From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 17 10:01:58 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46B4416A4B3 for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2003 10:01:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web40311.mail.yahoo.com (web40311.mail.yahoo.com [66.218.78.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 55A4843F85 for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2003 10:01:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from m_evmenkin@yahoo.com) Message-ID: <20031017170157.17411.qmail@web40311.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [66.35.239.94] by web40311.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 17 Oct 2003 10:01:57 PDT Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 10:01:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Maksim Yevmenkin To: Peter Pentchev In-Reply-To: <20031017153827.GD57130@straylight.oblivion.bg> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii cc: hackers@freebsd.org cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Darwin/OSX Bluetooth code X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 17:01:58 -0000 Peter, > > I'm currently thinking about un-Netgraph'ing FreeBSD code to make it > portable > > to other BSD style systems. I'm trying to look at other implementations > > and learn as much as i can. In particular i'm trying to figure out how to > > minimize OS dependent code and what is the right abstractions levels. > > When I saw your BlueTooth entry in the recent status report, I thought > I'd comment on that, but then got distracted :) > > You've done some great work on BlueTooth. IMHO, it would be a mistake Thank you. > to try to un-NetGraph it; there have been lots of rumours about people > porting the NetGraph framework to other OS's, and if BlueTooth support > will provide yet one more reason for the need to do this, so be it :) I'm not so sure about these rumors. To me it looks like NetBSD and OpenBSD folks are reluctant to adopt/port Netgraph. Also, when i started this project, few people have pointed out that it would much better if other BSDs could share the code. > NetGraph is a wonderful framework for writing drivers, and not limited > to network drivers, either - as you have no doubt discovered so far - > there should be no need to give up its advantages if it's possible to > retain them and even gain much in portability for the writing of future > drivers (should NetGraph run on more OS's). I could not agree more. Netgraph is extremely flexible and when it comes to a rapid prototype development it is a number one choice. However, the fact is Netgraph is FreeBSD only framework (at least for now). So i think all BSDs would benefit from the common code (and as an extra bonus FreeBSD could have Netgraph support :) thanks, max __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com