From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 18 16:43:03 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2323016A417; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 16:43:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (bsdimp.com [199.45.160.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1A6413C46E; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 16:43:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l9IGej2G006242; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 10:40:45 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 10:40:44 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <20071018.104044.74743493.imp@bsdimp.com> To: netchild@freebsd.org From: Warner Losh In-Reply-To: <20071018112307.pkb8qmn8ao4cog80@webmail.leidinger.net> References: <20071018091134.jzo7m88374ow00c8@webmail.leidinger.net> <20071018.013827.-749244202.imp@bsdimp.com> <20071018112307.pkb8qmn8ao4cog80@webmail.leidinger.net> X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: wb@freebie.xs4all.nl, phk@phk.freebsd.dk, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, cvs-src@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc Makefile sensorsd.conf src/etc/defaults rc.conf src/etc/rc.d Makefile sensorsd src/lib/libc/gen sysctl.3 src/sbin/sysctl sysctl.8 sysctl.c src/share/man/man5 rc.conf.5 src/share/man/man9 Makefile sensor_attach.9 src/sys/conf files ... X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 16:43:03 -0000 > If someone wants to support Poul in his raid against the _idea_ of the > framework _without_ providing technical arguments against the _idea_, One of my main objections to the framework is that it precludes user-level sensors without some hokey interface for the userland sensor to write into the kernel its current values. It is certainyl a technical weakness in the current setup. It works for some i2c parts and a few others, but it falls down in the general case. That's what Poul has been trying to tell you and you've been dismissing this, and other arguments as irrelevant and tuen turning around and saying Poul isn't making a technical argument. Give me a break. Warner