The following reply was made to PR kern/34085; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Christian Biere <christianbiere@gmx.de>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: kern/34085: "scsibus* at umass?" missing for GENERIC kernel
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 14:39:38 +0200

 Quentin Garnier wrote:
 > > The following line is missing in the GENERIC kernel for several
 > > platforms:
 
 > > scsibus* at umass? channel ?
 > No, it's not missing.
  
 > It's not that you can't have it;  you very well can, and the alpha
 > config proves it.  My point is that if you have "scsibus* at scsi?",
 > you don't need it.
 
 As said, I booted a GENERIC kernel and there was no sd* to mount. I
 have also a digital camera which is mounted as storage device over
 USB. That one worked out-of-the-box IIRC but that one uses atapibus*.
 
 The only SCSI-relevant line in the boot messages was
 "scsibus0: device not configured"
 
 (or similar)
 
 > That's the thing:  if "scsibus* at scsi?" appears before the
 > instance attaching at umass, the latter will never even be
 > considered by autoconf(9) because the two are semantically
 > equivalent for an attachment at umass.
 
 Indeed I appended the line "scsibus* at umass?" without "channel?"
 actually. Contrary to what you write, this does work. I did not
 comment out the existing line.
 
 > So if you have the two lines, you're actually wasting the few bytes
 > of a cfdata structure.
 
 That's why I wrote, ``comment it out if desired''. As you can imagine
 I really don't care about this minor wastage in my case as long as it
 works but I'll comment out the "scsibus* at scsi?" line if you say
 only one of them is necessary.
 
 > I'll probably fix scsibus.4, too, although it's interesting to have
 > a list somewhere of the devices that expose the scsi attribute, so
 > it does make sense to have it that way.
 
 I see you removed the relevant hint from scsibus(4). I doubt that
 I would have figured out how to tweak the kernel configuration to
 get the device working.
 
 Is there something I'm missing? Does the GENERIC kernel now find
 and configure such devices? I'm really confused because to me it
 looks things just got worse due to my change request. I will be
 more careful with my suggestions in the future.
 
 -- 
 Christian