Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 15:52:08 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG, "Long, Scott" <Scott_Long@adaptec.com>, re@FreeBSD.ORG, Maksim Yevmenkin <myevmenk@exodus.net>, Murray Stokely <murray@freebsdmall.com> Subject: Re: Bluetooth code Message-ID: <3DCAFCA8.DF1FF47A@mindspring.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0211071328530.5860-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> <038501c286b2$5efb1890$52557f42@errno.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sam Leffler wrote: > I don't want to see multiple instances of Bluetooth support in the system. > As you noted there's a netbsd implementation already. Having multiple > incompatible implementations of the same protocol stack is silly. If this > one is better than the netbsd one then great, but I want to see answers to > these questions. Usually, I'm on the same page with you... but this time, no. There are a *lot* of FreeBSD-specific changes that have gone into FreeBSD without going into NetBSD/OpenBSD/BSI/OS-X, and there was not a lot of complaining (except by a few of us) when those changes went in. Complaining when someone makes NetBSD-specific changes, and then doesn't port them to FreeBSD, is, well, not really sane. > Using netgraph for prototyping is fine. Using it for a final version means > only freebsd users can make use of it. There aren't enough *bsd users > around to not _TRY_ to get everyone sharing code. Perhaps you should port > netgraph to other bsd's? It's really easy to make the same argument about the VM system in FreeBSD, the VM system in NetBSD, or the VFS changes in FreeBSD that made it impossible to share VFS modules between FreeBSD and NetBSD -- an ongoing process that started in 1994, when FreeBSD and NetBSD adopted different parameter definitions for the cookie support in VOP_READDIR() for restarting directory enumerations over NFS. The counterargument is "port NetGraph to NetBSD, OpenBSD, and BSDI". The issue that's being raised here is "Who gets to lead the parade?"; the answer "Be a follower, not a leader" isn't very satisfying to anyone. > I like this work. I think it deserves inclusion in the system somewhere. > I'm not keen on it being tied to netgraph but undoing that is obviously > major work. What I'd most like to understand is how it compares to the > netbsd implementation and if it's going to be actively used and maintained. I think the most salient comparison is "It runs on FreeBSD, and the NetBSD implementation does not"; all other considerations must be secondary to rough consensus and working code. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3DCAFCA8.DF1FF47A>