From owner-freebsd-isdn@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 1 17:19:37 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-isdn@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CE1016A469 for ; Sat, 1 Dec 2007 17:19:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hselasky@c2i.net) Received: from swip.net (mailfe05.swip.net [212.247.154.129]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFF5113C46B for ; Sat, 1 Dec 2007 17:19:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hselasky@c2i.net) X-Cloudmark-Score: 0.000000 [] Received: from [85.19.218.45] (account mc467741@c2i.net [85.19.218.45] verified) by mailfe05.swip.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.13) with ESMTPA id 611004191; Sat, 01 Dec 2007 18:19:34 +0100 From: Hans Petter Selasky To: freebsd-isdn@freebsd.org, gary.jennejohn@freenet.de Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 18:20:08 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <474EE92C.3000406@merlin-home.dtdns.net> <47514B53.9000409@ovb.ch> <20071201153523.15682288@peedub.jennejohn.org> In-Reply-To: <20071201153523.15682288@peedub.jennejohn.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200712011820.09373.hselasky@c2i.net> Cc: Subject: Re: Support of ISDN Subsystem under Freebsd 6.x/7.x - amd64 X-BeenThere: freebsd-isdn@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Using ISDN with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2007 17:19:37 -0000 On Saturday 01 December 2007, Gary Jennejohn wrote: > On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 12:53:55 +0100 > > Oliver von Bueren wrote: > > I still don't know why nobody bothers to include the i4b by HPS into the > > main tree. I couldn't use the built-in stack since ages because of the > > lack of proper card support for passive cards with CAPI support, which > > is working in his version. Active ones might be better in the tree. > > HPS has a rather arcane coding style which makes it hard to maintain > his code in the tree. We don't want code in the tree which can be > maintained/understood by only one external developer. > > As a port it would probably be OK, but it might be difficult to > integrate it cleanly. Still, there are other ports which touch the > kernel, so it should be doable. AFAIK HPS hasn't considered this > possiblility. Hi Gary, Regarding code style I have a script that will make the code more FreeBSD KNF compliant. I just haven't had time to work so much at it. If you think you can do better I will gladly accept patches and improvements into my SVN repo. When I started out on ISDN4BSD more than 6 years ago everything was greek to me. Now I understand it all. Maybe that is the problem. You have to spend more time to understand others code ? --HPS