Subject: Re: SCSI _is_ still broken on VS3100
To: None <email@example.com>
From: maximum entropy <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/14/1999 20:54:43
>Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 21:18:06 +0100
>From: Ignatios Souvatzis <email@example.com>
>Put their identification into the quirk table. If there isn't support for
>disconnection inhibit, add it.
Should this really be done on a drive-by-drive basis? Or should I
just add the quirk for all SCSI-1 drives?
We seem to be out of unique quirk bits. Can bits that are used for
ATAPI devices be used (with a different meaning) for SCSI devices?
Right now there's no overlap, but that doesn't mean there can't be, I
Should this discussion be moved somewhere else, perhaps tech-kern?
entropy -- it's not just a good idea, it's the second law.