From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Jul 10 06:27:32 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA11276
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 06:27:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from root.com (implode.root.com [198.145.90.17])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA11270
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 06:27:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by root.com (8.7.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id GAA03839; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 06:27:25 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199607101327.GAA03839@root.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: implode.root.com: Host localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol
To: "Steve Sims" <SimsS@Infi.Net>
cc: hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Some recent changes to GENERIC 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 10 Jul 1996 08:49:04 EDT."
             <199607101250.IAA29257@mh004.infi.net> 
From: David Greenman <davidg@root.com>
Reply-To: davidg@root.com
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 06:27:25 -0700
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>(For my benefit, can anyone explain why the default port address for ed0
>is 0x280?  I assume some historical reason, but I really don't know the
>details....)
>
>OK, how 'bout this:  I'll endorse nuking the ed1 device, but only if the
>default settings for the ed0 device are changed to 5/300 in GENERIC.  What
>say?

   This seems reasonable to me. 0x300 is supported by all of the ed-compatible
cards as far as I know.

-DG

David Greenman
Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project