SPACE ALLOCATION IN PROCESS --> SPACE ALLOCATION IN PROGRESS
jgeldman at lexar.com
jgeldman at lexar.com
Wed Feb 25 11:37:57 PST 2009
Formatted message: <a href="http://www.t10.org/cgi-bin/ac.pl?t=r&f=r0902252_f.htm">HTML-formatted message</a>
I'll bite. I don't understand the difference between the English
definitions. Perhaps I would care if I understood.
Did someone spell "PROCESS" wrong and request "PROGRESS" to cover up?
Please explain the rationale for this change.
From: owner-t10 at t10.org [mailto:owner-t10 at t10.org] On Behalf Of Ralph
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:25 AM
To: 't10 at t10.org'
Subject: SPACE ALLOCATION IN PROCESS --> SPACE ALLOCATION IN PROGRESS
After lengthy discussions between the affected editors, we
have decided to change IN PROCESS to IN PROGRESS as per the
request duplicated below. This change will be reflected in
the next major revisions of SPC-4 and SBC-3.
Complaints about this change, if any, should be posted to
this reflector before the March T10 meeting week.
All the best,
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: spc4r18: space allocation in process?
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 19:39:11 +0100
From: Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert at interlog.com>
Reply-To: dgilbert at interlog.com
To: roweber at ieee.org
The recently added asc/ascq code 4h,14h looks a bit odd
when compared to the adjacent entries:
04h/04h DTL RO B LOGICAL UNIT NOT READY, FORMAT IN PROGRESS
04h/05h DT W O A BK F LOGICAL UNIT NOT READY, REBUILD IN PROGRESS
04h/06h DT W O A BK LOGICAL UNIT NOT READY, RECALCULATION IN
04h/07h DTLPWROMAEBKVF LOGICAL UNIT NOT READY, OPERATION IN PROGRESS
04h/08h R LOGICAL UNIT NOT READY, LONG WRITE IN PROGRESS
04h/09h DTLPWROMAEBKVF LOGICAL UNIT NOT READY, SELF-TEST IN PROGRESS
04h/0Ah DTLPWROMAEBKVF LOGICAL UNIT NOT ACCESSIBLE, ASYMMETRIC ACCESS
04h/0Bh DTLPWROMAEBKVF LOGICAL UNIT NOT ACCESSIBLE, TARGET PORT IN
04h/0Ch DTLPWROMAEBKVF LOGICAL UNIT NOT ACCESSIBLE, TARGET PORT IN
04h/0Dh F LOGICAL UNIT NOT READY, STRUCTURE CHECK
04h/10h DT WROM B LOGICAL UNIT NOT READY, AUXILIARY MEMORY NOT
04h/11h DT WRO AEB VF LOGICAL UNIT NOT READY, NOTIFY (ENABLE SPINUP)
04h/12h M V LOGICAL UNIT NOT READY, OFFLINE
04h/13h DT R MAEBKV LOGICAL UNIT NOT READY, SA CREATION IN PROGRESS
04h/14h D B LOGICAL UNIT NOT READY, SPACE ALLOCATION IN
Would "in progress" (rather than "in process") be more consistent?
More information about the T10