From owner-freebsd-current Sat Jul 19 08:35:49 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA29825 for current-outgoing; Sat, 19 Jul 1997 08:35:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA29819; Sat, 19 Jul 1997 08:35:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.6/8.6.9) with ESMTP id IAA21012; Sat, 19 Jul 1997 08:34:50 -0700 (PDT) To: dg@root.com cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: I am contemplating the following change... In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 19 Jul 1997 06:10:40 PDT." <199707191310.GAA18559@implode.root.com> Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 08:34:50 -0700 Message-ID: <21008.869326490@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > irq 5 is used because it is the standard for all 8bit Western Digital > 8003 cards and all 3Com 3c503 boards. I think it might even be the standard > for Novell NE1000/NE2000 cards. In other words, it's far more common than > irq 10 which is only found on 16bit WD/SMC cards. It's far more common in the 8 bit cards, yes. I would, however, hypothesize that the 16 bit cards have now (or will very shortly) outnumber the legacy equipment. I do know that I've certainly received a considerable amount of negative feedback over the choice of 5 ("5?! Who uses that anymore? 10! The default value should be 10! What are you guys thinking?!") :-) How does the "user base" feel about this? Jordan