From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.44.254]) by listman.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9060C3F2E1 for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 16:30:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail.redhat.com (mail.redhat.com [199.183.24.239]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g0ALUEE23262 for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 16:30:14 -0500 Received: (from mail@localhost) by mail.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.8.7) id g0ALUEk11126 for blinux-list@listman.redhat.com; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 16:30:14 -0500 Received: from dc.cis.okstate.edu (dc.cis.okstate.edu [139.78.100.219]) by mail.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.8.7) with ESMTP id g0ALUDd11120 for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 16:30:13 -0500 Received: from dc.cis.okstate.edu (localhost.cis.okstate.edu [127.0.0.1]) by dc.cis.okstate.edu (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g0ALUDg83019 for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:30:13 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from martin@dc.cis.okstate.edu) Message-Id: <200201102130.g0ALUDg83019@dc.cis.okstate.edu> To: blinux-list@redhat.com Subject: Re: Still Having Fun with SCSI Emulation. Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:30:13 -0600 From: "Martin G. McCormick" X-Loop: blinux-list@redhat.com Sender: blinux-list-admin@redhat.com Errors-To: blinux-list-admin@redhat.com X-BeenThere: blinux-list@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.1 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: blinux-list@redhat.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Linux for blind general discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Janina Sajka writes: >Do you reference ide-scsi in your lilo.conf? No, and if I was a gambler, I would bet that there in lies the problem. > I have it as: > >append = "hdc=ide-scsi hde=ide-scsi" I remember reading that directive in the HOWTO or somewhere that dealt with this topic and I was kind of confused at the time or maybe half asleep and thought that this was something taken care of in the kernel configuration. Do you have the SCSI emulation and driver set up as loadable modules or did you just reply y to having that module become an integral part of the kernel? That is how I have done the SCSI configuration because it is something that will more than likely get used all the time. Except for the increase in kernel size, it is probably more efficient to have things like that compiled in. As I said, this may be the missing link that explains why nothing seems to tie the SCSI support to what is actually there. Again thanks for the reminder. I certainly hope that that is what's missing. This system just isn't that unusual. Martin