On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:21 PM, wrote:
> Please don't start another "SCST Vs. LIO" holy war here. We all know why LIO
> belongs to Linux kernel and SCST does not.
SCST is not familiar to me. Does this mean that SCST is competition
for the StarWind products but LIO not ?
Fubo.
--
To
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:01 AM, Andy Grover wrote:
> On 01/17/2013 12:56 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
>> On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 02:19 +0100, Andreas Steinmetz wrote:
>>> This is not a technical point of view. This is a more or less political
>>> and user point of view. And for any replies,
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:01 AM, Andy Grover agro...@redhat.com wrote:
On 01/17/2013 12:56 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 02:19 +0100, Andreas Steinmetz wrote:
This is not a technical point of view. This is a more or less political
and user point of view. And for any
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:21 PM, pr...@starwindsoftware.com wrote:
Please don't start another SCST Vs. LIO holy war here. We all know why LIO
belongs to Linux kernel and SCST does not.
SCST is not familiar to me. Does this mean that SCST is competition
for the StarWind products but LIO not ?
Please don't start another "SCST Vs. LIO" holy war here. We all know why LIO
belongs to Linux kernel and SCST does not.
On Friday, January 18, 2013 3:54:18 AM UTC+2, Vladislav Bolkhovitin wrote:
> Andreas Steinmetz, on 01/16/2013 08:19 PM wrote:
>
> > Thus, lio (http://www.linux-iscsi.org/)
Please don't start another SCST Vs. LIO holy war here. We all know why LIO
belongs to Linux kernel and SCST does not.
On Friday, January 18, 2013 3:54:18 AM UTC+2, Vladislav Bolkhovitin wrote:
Andreas Steinmetz, on 01/16/2013 08:19 PM wrote:
Thus, lio (http://www.linux-iscsi.org/) seemed to
Andreas Steinmetz, on 01/16/2013 08:19 PM wrote:
Thus, lio (http://www.linux-iscsi.org/) seemed to be the politically and
technically favoured solution.
[...]
The fun part of it was that I finally ended up using SCST - which was
refrained from kernel inclusion for technical reasons beyond
On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 14:31 -0800, Andy Grover wrote:
> On 01/17/2013 12:56 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 02:19 +0100, Andreas Steinmetz wrote:
> >> This is not a technical point of view. This is a more or less political
> >> and user point of view. And for any
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Andy Grover wrote:
>
> No... actually upstream targetcli/rtslib are not very well maintained.
> Around 5 patches each in the last year.
>
> Meanwhile, I have been actively maintaining branches at
> github.com/agrover/targetcli-fb and github.com/agrover/rtslib-fb.
On 01/17/2013 12:56 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 02:19 +0100, Andreas Steinmetz wrote:
>> This is not a technical point of view. This is a more or less political
>> and user point of view. And for any replies, I'm not subscribed (haven't
>> been now for years).
>>
>> As
On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 12:56 -0800, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
>
> On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 02:19 +0100, Andreas Steinmetz wrote:
> > This is not a technical point of view. This is a more or less political
> > and user point of view. And for any replies, I'm not subscribed (haven't
>
Hi Andreas,
On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 02:19 +0100, Andreas Steinmetz wrote:
> This is not a technical point of view. This is a more or less political
> and user point of view. And for any replies, I'm not subscribed (haven't
> been now for years).
>
> As a user, I was in need for an iSCSI target.
Hi Andreas,
On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 02:19 +0100, Andreas Steinmetz wrote:
This is not a technical point of view. This is a more or less political
and user point of view. And for any replies, I'm not subscribed (haven't
been now for years).
As a user, I was in need for an iSCSI target.
On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 12:56 -0800, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
Hi Andreas,
On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 02:19 +0100, Andreas Steinmetz wrote:
This is not a technical point of view. This is a more or less political
and user point of view. And for any replies, I'm not subscribed (haven't
been
On 01/17/2013 12:56 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 02:19 +0100, Andreas Steinmetz wrote:
This is not a technical point of view. This is a more or less political
and user point of view. And for any replies, I'm not subscribed (haven't
been now for years).
As a user, I
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Andy Grover agro...@redhat.com wrote:
No... actually upstream targetcli/rtslib are not very well maintained.
Around 5 patches each in the last year.
Meanwhile, I have been actively maintaining branches at
github.com/agrover/targetcli-fb and
On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 14:31 -0800, Andy Grover wrote:
On 01/17/2013 12:56 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 02:19 +0100, Andreas Steinmetz wrote:
This is not a technical point of view. This is a more or less political
and user point of view. And for any replies, I'm not
Andreas Steinmetz, on 01/16/2013 08:19 PM wrote:
Thus, lio (http://www.linux-iscsi.org/) seemed to be the politically and
technically favoured solution.
[...]
The fun part of it was that I finally ended up using SCST - which was
refrained from kernel inclusion for technical reasons beyond
This is not a technical point of view. This is a more or less political
and user point of view. And for any replies, I'm not subscribed (haven't
been now for years).
As a user, I was in need for an iSCSI target. Actually, I needed to
export a SAS tape device (Ultrium 5) - which is one of the
This is not a technical point of view. This is a more or less political
and user point of view. And for any replies, I'm not subscribed (haven't
been now for years).
As a user, I was in need for an iSCSI target. Actually, I needed to
export a SAS tape device (Ultrium 5) - which is one of the
20 matches
Mail list logo
