Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 15:35:23 +0100 From: Gary Jennejohn <gary.jennejohn@freenet.de> To: freebsd-isdn@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Support of ISDN Subsystem under Freebsd 6.x/7.x - amd64 Message-ID: <20071201153523.15682288@peedub.jennejohn.org> In-Reply-To: <47514B53.9000409@ovb.ch> References: <474EE92C.3000406@merlin-home.dtdns.net> <200711291751.25402.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <20071130084253.R53707@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> <47514B53.9000409@ovb.ch>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 12:53:55 +0100 Oliver von Bueren <maillist@ovb.ch> wrote: > I still don't know why nobody bothers to include the i4b by HPS into the > main tree. I couldn't use the built-in stack since ages because of the > lack of proper card support for passive cards with CAPI support, which > is working in his version. Active ones might be better in the tree. > HPS has a rather arcane coding style which makes it hard to maintain his code in the tree. We don't want code in the tree which can be maintained/understood by only one external developer. As a port it would probably be OK, but it might be difficult to integrate it cleanly. Still, there are other ports which touch the kernel, so it should be doable. AFAIK HPS hasn't considered this possiblility. -- Gary Jennejohn
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071201153523.15682288>