[CentOS] CentOS and Marvell SAS/SATA drivers

[m.roth at 5-cent.us]

Drew wrote:
>> I blame Adaptec for the dominance of IDE. Â Seriously.
>>
>> If Adaptec A) hadn't had the lionshare of the SCSI mindset in the PC
>> business back in the 90s, and B) hadn't made so much overpriced buggy
>> crap, we'd all be using SCSI today.
>
> Yes and No. I remember playing with it back in the 90's and what drove
> me away from SCSI was the complexity of the standard. Yes Adaptec made
> it harder then it had to be but IDE, for all it's failings, was easier
> to use. You jumper'd one disk as master and one as slave and it pretty
> much just worked. SCSI on the other hand, at least in
> DOS/Win3/Win95/98, was a complex process involving TSR's and fiddling
> with jumpers on the disks & HBA. I remember my father spent six hours
> trying to get a simple SCSI scanner to work.
<snip>
Huh - odd. I know it didn't take me very long (once I'd gotten a used SIIG
SCSI card from a co-worker) to get my SCSI scanner up and running under
Win95 (and I still have both the card and the scanner....)

           mark