[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: kernel 2.4.* vs 2.6.* and ATAPI dvd question

On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 16:53:44 -0400
Greg <unix@caribsurf.com> wrote:

> At last!
> 	Not only am I not inebriated, but I remembered where I read what I 
> based my missive on. :-)
>   http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/man/README/README.ATAPI
> An extract from which goes as follows:
> "The ATAPI standard describes method of sending SCSI commands over IDE
> 	transport with some small limitations to the "real" SCSI standard.
> 	SCSI commands are send via IDE transport using the 'ATA packet'
> 	command. There is no SCSI emulation - ATAPI drives include native
> 	SCSI command support. For this reason, sending SCSI commands to ATAPI
> 	drives is the native method of supporting ATAPI devices. Just imagine
> 	that IDE is one of many SCSI low level transport mechanisms.
> 	This is a list of some known SCSI transports:
> 	-	Good old Parallel SCSI 50/68 pin (what most people call SCSI)
> 	-	SCSI over fiber optics (e.g. FACL - there are others too)
> 	-	SCSI over a copper variant of FCAL (used in modern servers)
> 	-	SCSI over IEEE 1394 (Fire Wire)
> 	-	SCSI over USB
> 	-	SCSI over IDE (ATAPI)
> 	As you now see, the use of the naming convention "ATAPI-SCSI emulation"
> 	is a little bit misleading. It should rather be called:
> 		"IDE-SCSI host adapter emulation"
> "
> Sooo, hopefully I was "wrong", but I knew what I really meant(?).

I can live with that. ;) 

I remember reading some time ago about how SCSI specifications get borrowed from on occasion in the creation of other specifications/standards.

A quick google search produces:


: which I am pretty sure was the same thing I read before.

Later, Seeker

Reply to: