Judgement of the SCSI Implementations:

SunOS Solaris Linux *BSD FreeBSDcam SGI HPUX
KERNEL 2 2 5 2 2 3 1
USER 2 1 3 6 1 1 21
TOTAL 2 2 52 5 2 33 2
1 Downgraded because the standard installation does not include device files
2 Not suitable for development of new programs. Design bugs in the /dev/sg driver will not allow to discover typical programming bugs in the new code.
3 Downgraded because the overall SCSI kernel implementation has some bugs
e.g. does not like SCSI bus disconnect after odd byte DMA

Ratings for above table:

1 = excellent
2 = good
3 = fair
4 = sufficient
5 = poor
6 = insuficient
Quality and absence of errors in the USER SCSI transport implementation e.g. transport of the SCSI command inside the kernel
Availability and usability of the SCSI user level device files e.g. Are they present by default, is is possible to automatically find the right device file for a specific target
Total average from the two groups above
I am sad to see that the two free UNIX clones have the worst SCSI user level transport implementations.
NOTE: The ratings mainly apply to the usability of the SCSI user level transport mechanism. They have been maded when porting cdrecord to the various architectures. For this reason, it does only include known problems of the overall behavior. The judgement for the whole SCSI implentation may be different if you spend more time with testing then I did.

Read some notes on the Linux SCSI implementation

GMD GMD Homepage GMD FOKUS FOKUS Homepage Schily Schily's Homepage Schily Cdrecord VED powered