Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 02:42:55 +0900 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com> To: Alex Zepeda <garbanzo@hooked.net> Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>, current <current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: newbus and modem(s) Message-ID: <371A199F.EB92AA09@newsguy.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9904180949320.281-100000@zippy.dyn.ml.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alex Zepeda wrote: > > On Mon, 19 Apr 1999, Daniel C. Sobral wrote: > > > I think CAM is a very bad example. We *still* don't have all the > > drivers we had, and that includes at least one reasonably requested > > driver. > > Is that an offer to write the missing drivers? Is that sidetracking the argument? :-) Alas, I found a FreeBSD driver for my card, which I don't have the heck whether it is aic-based or not, and I'll try to write a -current driver based on it. > Sure, egcs created problems, but at least the general public was warned > that this was going to be merged soon. But the kernel worked, and C > programs worked usually. I agree that a heads up a few days earlier would have been in order. I even recall a certain document might have mentioned something to this effect... Which is a different issue altogether. > Why would I say it wasn't ready? Because outside of core (apparently), > nobody was warned/told that this was going to be committed in a few > days/hours/minutes. Nobody warning is a very different issue from it not being ready. > Glitches? What about the sbxvi driver? The apm driver? Sure, I'm > annoyed about one of the glitches affecting me, but I just think if this > code had been aired more publically before merging, all of these problems > could have been easily avoided. Looks like glitches to me. And, as Jordan said, -current's purpose is airing code more publically. > And then what about newconfig? To me this just adds more truth to the > whole /. argument that *BSD promotes a closed development model. New-bus mailing list was open to subscription, the cvs repository for the code was announced, and, if I'm not mistaken, you could even cvsup it from cvsup2. It lacked a "Hey, people, new-bus *IS* going to be imported into FreeBSD at some point in the near future" message, so people who did not look further would have no doubts about it, but this is a minor point. As for the newconfig people, it *was* said to them that FreeBSD *was* going with new-bus. I suspect that, not liking this direction, they opted to proceed with their code, in the hope that working code wins against vaporware any day. Unfortunately, for them, newbus isn't vaporware. And, as Jordan said, only one of newbus and newconfig could be choosen, so there is nothing "closed" about choosing. -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) dcs@newsguy.com dcs@freebsd.org "Well, Windows works, using a loose definition of 'works'..." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?371A199F.EB92AA09>