From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 12 19:06:14 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C81176D for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 19:06:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: from be-well.ilk.org (be-well.ilk.org [23.30.133.173]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC1DC1731 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 19:06:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lowell-desk.lan (lowell-desk.lan [172.30.250.41]) by be-well.ilk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E53F33C4B for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:06:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: by lowell-desk.lan (Postfix, from userid 1147) id 3A8EF39860; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:06:06 -0400 (EDT) From: Lowell Gilbert To: FreeBSD Subject: Re: none References: <20130412105044.DGJ71030@ms5.mc.surewest.net> <447gk7aahp.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> <20130412144341.0362e296@scorpio> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:06:06 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20130412144341.0362e296@scorpio> (jerry@seibercom.net's message of "Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:43:41 -0400") Message-ID: <44fvyv8t7l.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 19:06:14 -0000 Jerry writes: > On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:07:30 -0400 > Lowell Gilbert articulated: No, I didn't. It was part of an attachment in my message. >> You'll need to run -CURRENT instead of 9.1, and all the caveats that >> apply. You'll also need the special HAL that hasn't yet been commited >> to -CURRENT. There are instructions on the freebsd-wireless mailing >> list. I'm using that exact card right now. > > Really off-topic, but HAL is now deprecated on many modern systems. Why > is FreeBSD continuing to use it? It is being replaced by "udev". You > would think that FreeBSD-10 would be a perfect time to put HAL to bed > and take a more modern approach. udev is tightly tied to the Linux kernel. I understand why you would refer to Linux as "many modern systems," but it's really not available on anything non-Linux, and it's so tightly tied to the Linux kernel device implementation that there's no reasonable way it could be.