Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 00:52:43 -0700 From: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it, ahasty@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-sys@FreeBSD.ORG, roger@cs.strath.ac.uk Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/pci brooktree848.c Message-ID: <199805190752.AAA00891@rah.star-gate.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 19 May 1998 17:23:43 %2B1000." <199805190723.RAA03775@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Fine what do you propose instead and I hope that you know why we
are adding the sysctl variables.
The Bt848 chipset per se we have a good handle on however we are falling
flat in our faces trying to support all the different tuners cropping
up and to make matters worse we can not uniquely identify some
Bt848 / tuners -- none of this is a problem on Win95 because the
manufacturer provides a custom driver. It is very difficult to
train users to go in the driver and modify it and it is not
a desired way of configuring the driver.
Cheers,
Amancio
> >When either you or Roger can verify the new sysctl hw.bt848.format,
> >I will commit the fix.
>
> Please don't.
>
> >hw.bt848.format = 0 | 1
> >
> >0 Denotes PAL
> >1 Denotes NTSC
> >
> >So far we have 4 bt848 sysctl variables 8)
> >
> >{hasty} sysctl hw.bt848
> >hw.bt848.card: -1
> >hw.bt848.tuner: -1
> >hw.bt848.reverse_mute: -1
> >hw.bt848.format: 1
>
> A sysctl is even worse than a config option for device control. ioctl(2)
> should be used for device control.
>
> Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199805190752.AAA00891>