Mike Long said:
> 
> 
> >From: Manuel Bouyer <bouyer@lix.polytechnique.fr>
> >Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 13:55:12 +0100 (MET)
> 
> >wdc0    at isa? port 0x1f0 irq 14
> >wdc1	at isa? port 0x170 irq ?
> >wd* at wdc? drive ?
> >atapibus* at wdc?  #one atapibus per controller
> >acd* at atapibus? drive ?   #The atapi cdrom, could be other devices
> 
> >Any comment/suggestions ?
> 
> I think 'atapibus' is redundant.  'scsibus' is necessary because the
> SCSI protocol is standardized but the I/O interface is not.  IDE (also
> EIDE and ATAPI) standardize both the protocol and the I/O interface.
> 

When i did this, i thought: "there should be an ATA bus, bus as the only device
i know on ATA is disk, this is redudent whith wd" :)

Well, i've heard (but i'm not shure) that some macintoshes had ide drives,
so there could be ATAPI devices on such hardware. But in this case, the device
driver for the adapter can't be shared with i386, because macintoshes are not
ISA.

--                                         
Manuel Bouyer, LIX, Ecole Polytechnique                                
email: bouyer@lix.polytechnique.fr                                     
--