Date: 25 Apr 2003 17:30:56 -0700 From: swear@attbi.com (Gary W. Swearingen) To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Code layout and debugging time Message-ID: <3qel3q9k1r.l3q@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <3EA9AFDA.65B1D90E@mindspring.com> References: <20030422132906.GB64101@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <444r4qmp6n.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> <20030422172549.GA65023@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <20030425044935.GG81840@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <3EA9AFDA.65B1D90E@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> writes: > Personally, I think Linux and FreeBSD driver code *should* document > the hardware, [...] And it should be kept in the source code (or an Article), not in the USER MANUAL, as seems to be SOP (eg, for the RealTek "rl" driver). Unfortunately, it's clear from intro(4) that FreeBSD prefers to have users slogging through the same manpages as driver developers. But I suppose it's practically unavoidable without paid documenters. And, though you apparently disagree with me, the documentation shouldn't publicly humiliate the hardware manufacturer, as the "rl" manpage does. A private message to the manufacturer would be more seemly. If I were RealTek, I'd withhold ALL documentation and communication with FreeBSD people until they stopped their anti-advertising campain against my company. I filed PR 31271 on this matter and it got multiple agreement from doc-ers and got "fixed", but it seems that somebody's vicious streak ran too deep and the nastiness was mostly restored -- and it's much worse in the driver source. And if RealTek has improved, as you say, those comments certainly ought to be improved too.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3qel3q9k1r.l3q>