Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:49:09 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu> Cc: arch@freebsd.org, multimedia@freebsd.org Subject: Re: drop snd_ from DRIVER_MODULEs... Message-ID: <20060419094909.pt0jmp5n4scg4kg4@netchild.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <20060418032520.GG38619@funkthat.com> References: <20060418032520.GG38619@funkthat.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu> (from Mon, 17 =20 Apr 2006 20:25:20 -0700): > Well, I noticed that we have a few extra snd_'s in front of most (all?) If it's not in front of all drivers for sound chips (!=3D all modules =20 which make up the sound system), it's an inconsistency which should be =20 fixed. > of our sound drives.. I believe this used to be necessary due to lack of > kldxref which couldn't find modules w/ different names than the modules.. > Now that this has been fixed, I feel that we should drop these so we > don't have issues w/ name mismatches, such as introduced w/ gusc and sbc.. What are the benefits of this patch? Why should we commit it? What's =20 wrong with the current way of naming? How is this patch an improvement? I don't object to the patch (haven't tested it), but what are the benefits? Bye, Alexander. --=20 http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137 Q:=09How many people from New Jersey does it take to change a light =09=09bulb? A:=09Three. One to do it, one to watch, and the third to shoot the =09=09witness.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060419094909.pt0jmp5n4scg4kg4>