Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest)

From: Joerg Schilling
Date: Mon Feb 13 2006 - 10:29:00 EST

Martin Mares <mj@xxxxxx> wrote:

> Hello!
> > libscg abstracts from a kernel specific transport and allows to write OS
> > independent applications that rely in generic SCSI transport.
> >
> > For this reason, it is bejond the scope of the Linux kernel team to decide on
> > this abstraction layer. The Linux kernel team just need to take the current
> > libscg interface as given as _this_ _is_ the way to do best abstraction.
> Do you really believe that libscg is the only way in the world how to
> access SCSI devices?
> How can you be so sure that the abstraction you have chosen is the only
> possible one?
> If an answer to either of this questions is NO, why do you insist on
> everybody bending their rules to suit your model?

Name me any other lib that is as OS independent and as clean/stable as
libscg is. Note that the interface from libscg did not really change
since August 1986.

> > The Linux kernel team has the freedom to boycott portable user space SCSI
> > applications or to support them.
> That's really an interesting view ... if anybody is boycotting anybody,
> then it's clearly you, because you refuse to extend libscg to support
> the Linux model, although it's clearly possible.

Looks like you did not follow the discussion :-(

I am constantly working on better support for Linux while the Linux kernel
folks do not even fix obvious bugs.


EMail:joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (uni)
schilling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (work) Blog:
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at