Mike Smith wrote:
> > So, you are saying that this is because there is not a seperate
> > "No BIOS" and "BIOS" section (or entry prefix) in the hints file,
> > so that in a non-PnP system, both the "No BIOS" and "BIOS"
> > entries will be examined, whereas on a PnP system, only the "BIOS"
> > entries will be examined?
> This would be an unnecessary complication.

I think the reason the hints are not just ignored is to allow
people to fix "rogue" hardware.  I'm willing to be corrected,
since this looks like about 12 lines of code would make it
ignore device.hints in the "PnP BIOS present" case.

> > PS: The "BIOS" section could be shipped non-empty, if it had
> > a "per-rogue" setion or prefix... then known broken PnP BIOS
> > systems would "just work".
> The amount of work involved in making this "just work" would be pretty
> enormous, and most of the applicable systems are approaching "relic"
> status, making it hard to find them in order to debug.

I wasn't suggesting that the work be done up front!

This would have to be handled on a case-by-case basis, by
the people having the problems with the defaults sending
in their identifying information and the fix that works
for them.  It would only accumulate the knowledge of the
rogues over an extended period of time, on an as-needed basis.

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to