What's this?  "preferably in source form"?  So you Plan 9 guys port
from binary drivers?  Very impressive.

I didn't write the Plan 9 drivers, but I imagine those who did relied
on both direct and indirect (as in, an understandable example as
Linux) documentation.  Since Linux ventures further into undocumented
territory than does Plan 9, I don't think significant mucking through
some vendor's convoluted compiler output has been needed: the Linux
kids have already done the dirty work.

What I keep hearing is that docs are wanted.  Some driver writers
outright refuse to port from source code, especially Linux source code
which tends to be buggy and undocumented.
http://www.openbsd.org/papers/opencon06-docs/mgp00017.html
(That series of slides has some interesting insights.)

I haven't checked, but I suspect that the FTDI devices have sufficient docs.

If by 'port' you mean hack some Linux fragment until it works with
your system, refusal doesn't surprise me.

Sans documentation, Linux fragments are the best we've got, and it
certainly beats mucking through some vendor's compiler output.  What
makes the OpenBSD developers think they will get direct documentation?
Do I hear the sound of naive, futile whining?  Obviously our economic
model is having problems adapting to situations so different from a
time in which the printing press was the dominant information
disseminator!  But complaining like Richard Stallman is pathetic and
ineffective.  Physicists don't cry to God for want of a documented
reality.  Cannot the collective be studied as is nature?  Collateral
increases as the collective's power grows... and the collective is
only getting stronger.  So down the road, expect to deal with botches
even greater than the IBM PC and Linux.  Reverse engineer everything
you can get your hands on.  Richard Feynman once said that if he had
to start all over again, he may have well studied the bureaucracy of
NASA rather than nature, as the former seemed to compete with the
latter in complexity.

Most people run MS-Virus-Server so why do we even need the
Open Graphics Project?

Linux compiler input is a lot more understandable than Windows NT
compiler output.  Let the few people who use OpenBSD and Plan 9 use
Linux as documentation: they should be happy they have at least that.
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)

Reply via email to