"John F. Woods" writes:
> Actually, I gather from searching through the mail archives that the answer
> is "no", but I'm wondering how many reasons there are that one can't do that
> and whether any or all of reasons might be fixed soon.
> 
> I assume the first stumbling block is that the firewire disk code currently
> just doesn't work.  I see that someone has ported FreeBSD's sbp code and
> that it supposedly works; is that going to be integrated anytime soon, or
> is the existing framework going to be fixed?

Dunno the answer to this.

> Even if that worked, would the RAIDframe driver work right with Firewire
> drives? 

I don't see why it wouldn't....  RAIDframe doesn't care what sort of 
physical or virtual device the component might be -- you just have to 
be able to point RAIDframe at the device.

> I see that RAIDframe names constituent drives with traditional
> device pathnames, and the last time I paid much attention to NetBSD's
> strategy for naming dynamically attached devices (like USB devices),
> the association with a drive and its pathname was pretty much just luck
> of the draw, or has some scheme been implemented for persistently naming
> removable drives?

If you had them all plugged in at boot, and had the RAID set 
configured with 'autoconfig', it wouldn't matter where they showed up 
-- RAIDframe would find them, group them, and configure them.

Later...

Greg Oster