From Franck.Sicard@miniruth.solsoft.fr Sat, 30 Oct 1999 14:46:29 +0200 Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 14:46:29 +0200 From: Franck SICARD Franck.Sicard@miniruth.solsoft.fr Subject: [Livid-dev] DVD patch for 2.2 kernel, where? Hi, Where can i find the DVD ioctl patch for a 2.2 kernel ? there URL: http://www.rpi.edu/~veliaa/linux-dvd given in the README of css-auth (in the CVS) is no more? maybe the patch could be added in the CVS archive in the css-auth dir? FRanck
From axboe@image.dk Sat, 30 Oct 1999 16:41:05 +0200 Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 16:41:05 +0200 From: Jens Axboe axboe@image.dk Subject: [Livid-dev] DVD patch for 2.2 kernel, where? On Sat, Oct 30 1999, Franck SICARD wrote: > Hi, > > Where can i find the DVD ioctl patch for a 2.2 kernel ? > > there URL: > http://www.rpi.edu/~veliaa/linux-dvd > given in the README of css-auth (in the CVS) is no more? > > maybe the patch could be added in the CVS archive in the css-auth dir? I have asked Matthew to set up a cdrom-patch module so that I can submit a current patch, but to my knowledge it is not there yet. I'd also like to clarify a few things about the patch confusion, as I see several "misguided" comments from time to time. - The dvd stuff that is in 2.3 (and the patches for 2.2 on my site) are based on Andrew's patches in that most of the code is just directly copied. The only difference as seen from a user space application is that I eliminated the key1/key2 and called them both key - this has caused some confusion and I am completely willing to change it back, since having people placing #ifdef's in their code should not be necessary. Having looked at the NetBSD DVD stuff just now, they use key too. So maybe we people should just bite the bullet and accept that key is the name of the member - this doesn't work for people with Andrew's patch, though. - Andrew's patch is for ide-cd.c, which means that it only works on ATAPI drives. The way I integrated it allows it to work equally well on SCSI and ATAPI without any code duplication. Some people mistakingly dub my patch "the scsi patch" - this is just plain wrong, it is no more SCSI than ATAPI specific. If people would actually bother to look at the code, this is very apparent. Hope this clears up the confusion - I'm open for input as always. -- * Jens Axboe <axboe@image.dk> * Linux CD-ROM Maintainer * http://www.kernel.dk