From owner-freebsd-current  Mon Jul 21 10:45:28 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA27972
          for current-outgoing; Mon, 21 Jul 1997 10:45:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA27952
          for <current@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 21 Jul 1997 10:45:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.6/8.6.9) with ESMTP id KAA28738; Mon, 21 Jul 1997 10:44:11 -0700 (PDT)
To: Mikael Karpberg <karpen@ocean.campus.luth.se>
cc: kuku@gilberto.physik.rwth-aachen.de (Christoph Kukulies),
        current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: I am contemplating the following change... 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 21 Jul 1997 16:41:09 +0200."
             <199707211441.QAA09641@ocean.campus.luth.se> 
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 10:44:11 -0700
Message-ID: <28734.869507051@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Ok... This just might seem like a silly question, but Jordan wanted to take
> away the double devices. Why?
> 
> ed0 == 300 / 10
> ed1 == 280 / 5
> 
> This seems to be a really great solution, since it satisfies both sides with
> a good default. It will make installing easier for everyone. Now what could
> possibly be good about removing the double entry?

Because I think the basic idea we're trying to push with the whole
userconfig thing (and its associated docs) are that you should always
edit ed0 to match your card, whatever that might be, and if it falls
to ed1 then something is _wrong_ and you should go back and edit the
entry for ed0 again. 

Also, with the settings as they currently stand today, you rarely get
fall back behavior which actually helps the user - far from it.  What
happens instead is that ed1's port value matches but the IRQ value is
still wrong, and while the user sees a "probe" for ed1 and an entry in
all the relevant selection menus (further leading them to feel that
things are fine), things hang up later when they actually go out and
try to use the card.  Timeouts, hangs, very confused users.

If, on the other hand, you didn't even show them an ethernet card as
an option, nor did they see a probe message for it at boot time, it's
be a strong indication to them that they need to go fix this problem
first.  When the ed1: timeout problems happen, by contrast, they
typically write to us since it's not a failure they understand.

					Jordan