From owner-freebsd-mobile Sun Mar 28 8: 7:14 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org Received: from chandra.eatell.msr.prug.or.jp (ykh28DS28.kng.mesh.ad.jp [133.205.214.28]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 486391536D for ; Sun, 28 Mar 1999 08:07:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from y-nakaga@nwsl.mesh.ad.jp) Received: from nwsl.mesh.ad.jp (localhost.eatell.msr.prug.or.jp [127.0.0.1]) by chandra.eatell.msr.prug.or.jp (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA00919; Sun, 28 Mar 1999 14:22:30 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <199903280522.OAA00919@chandra.eatell.msr.prug.or.jp> To: Juriy Goloveshkin Cc: freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Re[2]: Which LAN PCCARD for FreeBSD (no PAO!) In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 27 Mar 1999 23:05:57 +0300." <10962.990327@avias.com> Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 14:22:30 +0900 From: NAKAGAWA Yoshihisa Sender: owner-freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > and if PAO is better, why it isn`t in "plain FreeBSD"? Because Nate disagree PAO integrate. He didn't understand PAO correctly. He belive "PAO is buggy", but it is not true. Many PAO code is very useful and correctly working. Main part of PAO, it should be integrated to "plain FreeBSD" (some experiments codes are not). -- NAKAGAWA, Yoshihisa y-nakaga@nwsl.mesh.ad.jp nakagawa@jp.FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-mobile" in the body of the message