From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 4 18:04:39 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16E6B106564A for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 18:04:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from 65-241-43-5.globalsuite.net (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01571150E80 for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 18:04:38 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4D9A0836.7070403@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 11:04:38 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110319 Thunderbird/3.1.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: hackers@freebsd.org References: <20110404141016.GL71940@rincewind.paeps.cx> In-Reply-To: <20110404141016.GL71940@rincewind.paeps.cx> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Re: Updating PCI vendors database X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 18:04:39 -0000 On 04/04/2011 07:10, Philip Paeps wrote: > It looks like our /usr/share/misc/pci_vendors list (used only by pciconf as > far as I can tell) has become rather stale. We also appear to be tracking > sources which no longer exist. > > Would anyone object if I updated this list to source the same database used by > Linux distributions at http://pciids.sourceforge.net/v2.2/pci.ids? > > It helps that our pciconf looks to be compatible with that format. We just > ignore subvendor and subdevice, but it doesn't appear to matter that the file > contains this information. > > I could cull the subvendor/subdevice from the list though. > > Any views? Having read this thread, and the last one, my opinion is, let's do it already. :) Repo churn should not, under any circumstances, be a consideration in technical improvements. I agree with those who have said that the new list should be confirmed to be a superset of the old, and anything missing should be merged in. Checking with Jack about Intel stuff is also reasonable, as would be cross-checking with what NetBSD and OpenBSD are doing (and perhaps communicating with them about your work). So, not a slam-dunk, but definitely a clear path forward. Oh, and I personally don't see a problem with MFC'ing this, but I'm willing to be convinced. Doug -- Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much. -- OK Go Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/