From owner-freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jul  7 11:22:15 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88C0216A4CE
	for <freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org>;
	Wed,  7 Jul 2004 11:22:15 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from bast.unixathome.org (bast.unixathome.org [66.11.174.150])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C93943D49
	for <freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org>;
	Wed,  7 Jul 2004 11:22:15 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from dan@langille.org)
Received: from wocker (wocker.unixathome.org [192.168.0.99])
	by bast.unixathome.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id DA0983D34; Wed,  7 Jul 2004 07:22:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Dan Langille" <dan@langille.org>
To: Drew Broadley <drew@corrupt.co.nz>
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 07:22:04 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <40EBA49C.25670.E18F167D@localhost>
Priority: normal
In-reply-to: <40EBD956.1050702@corrupt.co.nz>
References: <40EB9B63.25323.E16B103E@localhost>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.12a)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-description: Mail message body
cc: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: D-Link DWL-650 Wireless PC Card RevP
X-BeenThere: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile computing with FreeBSD <freebsd-mobile.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-mobile>,
	<mailto:freebsd-mobile-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-mobile>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-mobile-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-mobile>,
	<mailto:freebsd-mobile-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 11:22:15 -0000

On 7 Jul 2004 at 23:07, Drew Broadley wrote:

> Dan Langille wrote:
> 
> >The second line was needed for my 5.2.1-RELEASE box and an em0 card.  
> >I found the first line wasn't needed, but didn't appear to do any 
> >harm either.  Also, I understand the need for 
> >hw.pci.allow_unsupported_io_range has recently been removed, and so 
> >should not be needed in recent -CURRENT.
> >  
> >
> Well due to the lack of knowledge of  how recent he has cvsup'd to the 
> latest src, I thought I would throw that in anyhow.
> The first line was pretty much the same reason, "just in case". There is 
> no harm in having them there.

There was no criticism of your advice in my post.  It was a FYI of 
what I'd learned recently.
-- 
Dan Langille : http://www.langille.org/