From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon May 29 10:38: 0 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from etinc.com (et-gw.etinc.com [207.252.1.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BB7937BCB7 for ; Mon, 29 May 2000 10:37:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dennis@etinc.com) Received: from dbsys (dbsys.etinc.com [207.252.1.18]) by etinc.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA23952; Mon, 29 May 2000 13:41:57 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200005291741.NAA23952@etinc.com> X-Sender: dennis@etinc.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 13:42:18 -0400 To: "Jeroen C. van Gelderen" From: Dennis Subject: Re: 4.0 - Isa devices not being probed Cc: hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <39305AAA.D8A9ECB6@vangelderen.org> References: <200005262147.PAA92719@harmony.village.org> <200005271908.PAA20241@etinc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 07:30 PM 5/27/00 -0400, Jeroen C. van Gelderen wrote: >Dennis wrote: >> >> At 09:54 AM 5/27/00 +0200, John Hay wrote: >> >> In message <200005261723.NAA16495@etinc.com> Dennis writes: >> >> : My 4.0 system doesnt probe ISA devices on my system. >> >> : >> >> : Whats the trick? Is there a config requirement with old-style drivers? >> >> >> >> They probe great for me. what, specifically, isn't probing? >> > >> >He is probably talking about their own driver. In that case you have to >> >add it to /sys/i386/isa/isa_compat.* or bite the bullet and new-busify >> >it. >> >> Yes....Whose brainstorm was it to use the new convoluted bus nonsense in >> FreeBSD 4.0? Clearly someone who never wrote a driver with a complex >> controller with indexed memory mapped registers.Whats next, assembler drivers? > >Uhm, the very fact that you are too simple-minded to understand the >new, flexible, structured, high-performance bus architecture is sad. >That you take it out on the people reading -current is beyond sad. >If you can't behave like an adult shut up and go away. I understand it, and I think it sucks. The world is going to object oriented languages to make programming complex tasks easier , and freebsd is going in the other direction. And you seem to have not considered "portability" between OS's, which is more important to the real software community than portability between hardware within an OS. The proper way to "genericize" busses is with library wrappers...transparent to the developer. CPUs today can crank out data 10 times faster than the busses can accept them...bastardizing the OS to make things a bit more efficient is not an accomplishment. DB To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message