From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Sep 10 23:24:20 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id XAA00991 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 10 Sep 1997 23:24:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from labinfo.iet.unipi.it (labinfo.iet.unipi.it [131.114.9.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA00976 for ; Wed, 10 Sep 1997 23:24:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (luigi@localhost) by labinfo.iet.unipi.it (8.6.5/8.6.5) id HAA23558; Thu, 11 Sep 1997 07:13:33 +0200 From: Luigi Rizzo Message-Id: <199709110513.HAA23558@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> Subject: Re: PnP support To: mike@smith.net.au (Mike Smith) Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 07:13:32 +0200 (MET DST) Cc: gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu, perhaps@yes.no, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199709110453.OAA06562@word.smith.net.au> from "Mike Smith" at Sep 11, 97 02:52:40 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Please, if you are going to do this, go back to the discussion that > came up last time on this topic, most particularly the allocation and > attachment strategy that Stefan and I discussed. Doing this job > half-assed is just going to mean that it will have to be done again. where was it discussed ? I do not remember having seen this on -hackers, although I brought up the subject in july (specifically about the attach returning or not an error value) when I started working on PnP. I am asking because I would like to help on this. Cheers Luigi