Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 15:29:24 -0700 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com> Cc: "freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org" <freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [rfc] removing the NDISulator Message-ID: <CAJ-VmomzydOD-M1oePMuqrgdBCFMTXKCZcGVwu%2BLFTnHTGg0Kw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201310212146.r9LLkqZ1044966@fire.js.berklix.net> References: <5265878B.1050809@yandex.ru> <201310212146.r9LLkqZ1044966@fire.js.berklix.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The NDISulator is a crutch from a time when there wasn't _any_ real alternative. There are plenty of alternatives now. What's lacking is desire and person-power. But the datasheets are there, or the vendor code has been released, or there's linux/otherbsd drivers. Leaving it in there is just delaying the inevitable - drivers need to be fixed, ported, or reverse engineered. This is going to upset users in the same way that eliminating any other transition/sideways compatibility layer upsets users. But as I said, the path forward is fixing up the lack of stable drivers, not simply supporting some crutch. If there are drivers that people absolutely need fixed then they should stand up and say "hey, I really would like X to work better!" and then follow it up with some encouraging incentives. Right now the NDISulator lets people work _around_ this by having something that kind of works for them but it doesn't improve our general driver / stack ecosystems. -adrian On 21 October 2013 14:46, Julian H. Stacey <jhs@berklix.com> wrote: > "Andrey V. Elsukov" <bu7cher@yandex.ru> wrote: > > > I'm agree. While there are still some devices without native drivers, > > but that work via NDISulator, we should keep it. > > Yes, best keep it while it helps some people. > > > Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > It's honestly about time that these were updated, fixed and/or ported to > > FreeBSD. > > > > So, I'm still going forward with the plan. I won't be killing it during > the > > 10 lifecycle. > > If ndis is removed while it works, that would be bad for users, > some of whom won't even be on lists, but use ndis as their lifeboat. > > If ndis is later labeled as abandoned & if maintenance ceases, & if it > then breaks, only then will pressure increase on others to step > forward & help fix things; if a wait then sees no one stepping forward, > surely only then would removal seem most appropriate ? > > Cheers, > Julian > -- > Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultant, Munich > http://berklix.com > Interleave replies below like a play script. Indent old text with "> ". > Send plain text, not quoted-printable, HTML, base64, or > multipart/alternative. >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-VmomzydOD-M1oePMuqrgdBCFMTXKCZcGVwu%2BLFTnHTGg0Kw>