Ugh, what? twa(4) being deprecated?

diizzy

Well-Known Member

Reaction score: 104
Messages: 392

You're still free to either maintain the driver yourself, pay someone to do it or stick to 12. Unfortunately drivers can't be maintained until the end of time because code evolve and you also need interest, time and actual hardware to maintain drivers. September 2013 is the newest drivers I can find from the manufacturer (irregardless of OS) so I'm going to say that you had a pretty good run for "free" support. I for one appreciate the honesty rather than keep claiming that it's supported and it's not working or poorly.

Depending where you live it may not be that much of a deal replacing it with something supported without breaking the bank.
https://www.newegg.com/p/1B3-002F-00002 (35$ refurb)
 
OP
msplsh

msplsh

Well-Known Member

Reaction score: 132
Messages: 410

The card is identified by twa, not the others.

It would be nice to get some kind of "hey this driver needs X" note before killing it. If I hadn't dug around I wouldn't have found it. The aha driver supports cards from 1990, so "you had a pretty good run for free support" is kind of "hunh what?" Support in general is kind of free for the OS? I just remember there was an announcement earlier about planning on dropping some network card support which made people wake up and go "hey, wait" and that decision was partially changed due to community response. This seems very un-announced and not planned. From my estimation the 3ware cards were very popular for NAS builds so this seems very surprising.

I put in a Areca controller that unfortunately hasn't had its open source driver updated since 10.0, but has a binary release for 12.2, simply because it was better behaved than the 3ware when I had these in my Mac Pro.
 

PMc

Daemon

Reaction score: 502
Messages: 1,062

Depending where you live it may not be that much of a deal replacing it with something supported without breaking the bank.
https://www.newegg.com/p/1B3-002F-00002 (35$ refurb)
That we are supposed to have ample money is not the point. The point is that all the hardware, when sorted out as no longer useful, goes to a waste heap (usually in Africa) in order to poison the environment.
So if some old hardware is still in working condition and good for the duty, it is always preferable to continue using it and thereby slowing the produce-to-poison cycle a bit.
 

diizzy

Well-Known Member

Reaction score: 104
Messages: 392

That we are supposed to have ample money is not the point. The point is that all the hardware, when sorted out as no longer useful, goes to a waste heap (usually in Africa) in order to poison the environment.
So if some old hardware is still in working condition and good for the duty, it is always preferable to continue using it and thereby slowing the produce-to-poison cycle a bit.
I think you're missing the point, 12 still carries the driver and there's nothing stopping you from using it 20 years from now or for that matter you maintaining it and so on. You can use old hardware but it obviously comes with some limitations. While it's technically possible to still use an old Pentium II (or similar in performance) computer it'll very likely be unbearably slow to use as a desktop, are you going to demand that the whole world is going to adapt to your hardware?

Support in this case means that the project as a whole has decided to drop support because of one or several reasons such as interest, documentation, hardware available etc. The code is free and if someone wants to provide an improved driver it would be perfectly fine to keep it as a port however I don't understand why people think it's their "right" to get support.

..and lets put it into a better perspective, say the driver is kept and because if its status (in tree / supported) people still use it and it turns out there's a nasty bug that corrupts your data. Are you going to blame yourself or blame a project/person for claiming the driver being supported despite no one is able to work on and test the driver not to mention the potential data loss? Just because something compiles doesn't mean that it works as intended.
 
OP
msplsh

msplsh

Well-Known Member

Reaction score: 132
Messages: 410

Look, I'm sure there's reasons for the commit that marked it for removal. I already know what I could do about it and it doesn't really matter what the reasons could be (may be completely understandable.) I simply want to know what they are and if anybody has any idea where to find that information.
 

PMc

Daemon

Reaction score: 502
Messages: 1,062

I think you're missing the point, 12 still carries the driver and there's nothing stopping you from using it 20 years from now or for that matter you maintaining it and so on. You can use old hardware but it obviously comes with some limitations. While it's technically possible to still use an old Pentium II (or similar in performance) computer it'll very likely be unbearably slow to use as a desktop, are you going to demand that the whole world is going to adapt to your hardware?
Yes, I understand that. There is a very strong urge to throw away things nowadays. In the internet more and more merchants start to offer a new service: they offer to throw away the freshly bought products before even sending them to their customers, so that these spare the hassle of having to receive them.

Support in this case means that the project as a whole has decided to drop support because of one or several reasons such as interest, documentation, hardware available etc. The code is free and if someone wants to provide an improved driver it would be perfectly fine to keep it as a port however I don't understand why people think it's their "right" to get support.
Nobody implied any "right" to get any support. Only the question was raised about the reason for dropping support. And in my viewpoint such question is absolutely valid, due to the beforementioned facts (Africa etc.).

..and lets put it into a better perspective, say the driver is kept and because if its status (in tree / supported) people still use it and it turns out there's a nasty bug that corrupts your data. Are you going to blame yourself or blame a project/person for claiming the driver being supported despite no one is able to work on and test the driver not to mention the potential data loss? Just because something compiles doesn't mean that it works as intended.
That's bogus. We have a user here, and maybe that user would be willing to run test cases. At this point we just don't know.
But this is exactly the problem that comes from the Ivory-Tower-League: per definition there has to be a strict separation between the users and the development, and per definition the users have to be extremely stupid and behave like you describe in this paragraph.
 

Elazar

Well-Known Member

Reaction score: 165
Messages: 436

You could ask the committer (imp) or the author of the driver (mentionend in the man file). There is also the freebsd-current mailing list.

My guess is that some subsystem (CAM?) changed and thus the driver needs an update.
 
OP
msplsh

msplsh

Well-Known Member

Reaction score: 132
Messages: 410

Asking imp directly is currently my plan absent any new information.
 
Top