On 03/27/13 21:14, Creamy wrote:
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 08:05:47PM +, Miod Vallat wrote:
Or are you just trolling for the sake of it?
I didn't expect that from you, frankly. Other people have been
rude to me off-list, but I thought you were above that.
You make some valid points,
Nick Holland nick at holland-consulting.net writes:
There is a lot of ISA stuff I'd object to removing from the kernel; none
of this is it. I'm entirely ok with this stuff going...
How about this one?
ie0 at isa? port 0x360 iomem 0xd irq 7 # StarLAN and 3C507
Looking at
On 28.03.2013, at 13:17, Daniel Bolgheroni dan...@bolgh.eng.br wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 05:46:30AM +, Miod Vallat wrote:
You can't say in substance it's a pity OpenBSD doesn't support the VAX
11/780 anymore in one mail, you guys really ought to ditch floppy
installation media in
please everyone, move this to misc@ if you want to continue, or just drop the
thread.
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 10:50:40PM +0400, Franco Fichtner wrote:
Nobody in their right mind would have such a system as
mission critical infrastructure. :)
What, like using a Honeywell 316 as a nuclear power station
reactor temperature monitor in to the early 2000s, until it's
hard disk failed?
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 09:00:39PM +0400, Franco Fichtner wrote:
On Mar 26, 2013, at 6:26 PM, Creamy cre...@nocrater.com wrote:
but I honestly question the utility of any of these ISA
network and SCSI drivers.
Perhaps somebody who is new to coding might be able to learn something
On 2013/03/26 18:06, Creamy wrote:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 09:00:39PM +0400, Franco Fichtner wrote:
On Mar 26, 2013, at 6:26 PM, Creamy cre...@nocrater.com wrote:
Looking to the future, when are we going to drop 486 support, anyway?
Now, that's a more interesting thing ask.
How much
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:43:53AM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2013/03/26 18:06, Creamy wrote:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 09:00:39PM +0400, Franco Fichtner wrote:
On Mar 26, 2013, at 6:26 PM, Creamy cre...@nocrater.com wrote:
Looking to the future, when are we going to drop 486
Hi,
Please, don't do this.
What exactly? You quoted my entire mail, but didn't narrow down exactly
which of my suggestions would cause problems for you.
I've jumped from OpenBSD to NetBSD boat when SCSI driver were rewritten
to the new version (between 3.1-stable and 3.2-stable), and my
In fact, to everybody else who is reading this, doesn't it just point out
that 486 support is, effectively, already broken, (as I suspected),
because the devices that typically go with machines of that era are
suffering bit-rot in the tree?
Absolutely not. First, 80486 support is not broken
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:04 PM, Miod Vallat m...@online.fr wrote:
Not sure about ancient 3Com's, but they are Ethernet at
least, in contract to Token-Ring device like tr*.
Do we support Token-Ring?
We used to, on TRopic boards, but since public documentation for TR
hardware amounts to
Do we support Token-Ring?
We used to, on TRopic boards, but since public documentation for TR
hardware amounts to zilch, and there is no interest in changing this
situation, it was eventually removed from the tree to clear the way of
other changes.
And with no TR stack, is there any
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 08:05:47PM +, Miod Vallat wrote:
In fact, to everybody else who is reading this, doesn't it just point out
that 486 support is, effectively, already broken, (as I suspected),
because the devices that typically go with machines of that era are
suffering
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 08:05:47PM +, Miod Vallat wrote:
In fact, to everybody else who is reading this, doesn't it just point out
that 486 support is, effectively, already broken, (as I suspected),
because the devices that typically go with machines of that era are
suffering bit-rot
Soekris NET4501 are still in use, and they are based upon 80486 cores.
`Key' ISA devices such as wdc are still heavily tested as pcmcia or such
attachments on i386 and non-i386 platforms. Other devices such as
com(4), pckbc(4), still exist on many systems, even if they are no
longer on
On 03/27/2013 01:01 PM, Creamy wrote:
Or, more realistically, perhaps you could just choose to maintain the
-patch branch of a particular version that was of interest to you. For
example, if we stopped supporting 486 in 6.0, by way of example, what
is to stop you taking 6.0 and maintaining a
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 08:14:20PM +, Creamy wrote:
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 08:05:47PM +, Miod Vallat wrote:
In fact, to everybody else who is reading this, doesn't it just point out
that 486 support is, effectively, already broken, (as I suspected),
because the devices that
What you're suggesting is a small part of the ISA code in the tree.
I did not want to list all isa drivers which happen to be tested a few
times every year either.
...and note that I've been working on the pckbc code for the last
couple of weeks, so I should be fully aware of it's existance.
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:24 PM, Miod Vallat m...@online.fr wrote:
Do we support Token-Ring?
We used to, on TRopic boards, but since public documentation for TR
hardware amounts to zilch, and there is no interest in changing this
situation, it was eventually removed from the tree to
Creamy [cre...@nocrater.com] wrote:
Miod, you seem like an all-right bloke, and I don't want to create
bad feelings, but you're insulting me on a public mailing list,
because I dare to bring up something you object to.
Other people have been rude to me in private mail, because my views
Don't forget, though, this *is* open source. If the project officially
drops support for anything you like, ultimately you are free to fork it.
It is. And we are the developers, and you are not. So put a sock in it.
Really, this community has an attitude problem - and you *need*
more developers, believe me, you shouldn't be trying to scare
them away.
You're right. We need more developers.
What we don't need is more people who have the time to send 25
long opinionated rants to our mailing lists.
So put
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 19:24:49 +
Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
However, I would be glad if the 486 support was kept as I have many
486 systems that I would like to be able to use if I ever get around
to porting the ethernet driver (which is open source).
Oops, just checked and
my thoughts inline...
On 03/26/13 05:20, Ted Unangst wrote:
These isa devs are already disabled and not particularly popular among
our users. affected: tcic, sea, wds, eg, el
Index: arch/i386/conf/GENERIC
===
RCS file:
I did not want to list all isa drivers which happen to be tested a few
times every year either.
OK, put it this way, there are at least some of the ISA drivers which
people are not using on a regular basis, and they are broken as a result
of that. Agree or not? We've *seen* examples of
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 05:20:27 -0400
From: Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com
These isa devs are already disabled and not particularly popular among
our users. affected: tcic, sea, wds, eg, el
The reason these devices are disabled is probably that their probe
routines are destructive. So
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 11:13, Mark Kettenis wrote:
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 05:20:27 -0400
From: Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com
These isa devs are already disabled and not particularly popular among
our users. affected: tcic, sea, wds, eg, el
The reason these devices are disabled is
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 11:13, Mark Kettenis wrote:
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 05:20:27 -0400
From: Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com
These isa devs are already disabled and not particularly popular among
our users. affected:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 09:09:14AM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 11:13, Mark Kettenis wrote:
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 05:20:27 -0400
From: Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com
These isa devs are already disabled and not particularly popular among
our users. affected: tcic,
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 14:26, Creamy wrote:
but I honestly question the utility of any of these ISA
network and SCSI drivers.
Perhaps somebody who is new to coding might be able to learn something
from them?
The last thing this world needs is more programmers who learned to
code by
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 09:09:14 -0400
From: Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 11:13, Mark Kettenis wrote:
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 05:20:27 -0400
From: Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com
These isa devs are already disabled and not particularly popular among
our
Sorry, but I think there is some seriously strange reasoning going on here.
It's not so much that we spend time maintaining the source, but I do
spend time compiling it.
Err, don't you use a custom kernel configuration? Unless you're working
on those drivers, why are you compiling them in
Penned by Ted Unangst on 20130326 8:09.14, we have:
| On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 11:13, Mark Kettenis wrote:
| Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 05:20:27 -0400
| From: Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com
|
| These isa devs are already disabled and not particularly popular among
| our users. affected: tcic,
These isa devs are already disabled and not particularly popular among
our users. affected: tcic, sea, wds, eg, el
No objection against removing them from kernel configs (or commenting
them out), but keep files.isa unchanged please.
On Mar 26, 2013, at 6:26 PM, Creamy cre...@nocrater.com wrote:
but I honestly question the utility of any of these ISA
network and SCSI drivers.
Perhaps somebody who is new to coding might be able to learn something
from them?
There is such a vast amount of code in the different BSD
I really don't see the point of removing these from the tree. I just
don't see greater value from removal, vs retention.
Sure you can remove their compilation in GENERIC by #'ing them there.
That I can understand. But if you remove the lines, noone can ever
use them again because they won't
I don't think maintaining these drivers is currently a huge burden on
us. But decoupling them from the build will almost certainly lead to
some degree of bitrot.
This 2nd sentence is the truth. At least when something is coupled to
the build, it might warn us of the unintended consequences
Todd T. Fries todd at fries.net writes:
I'd wager a bet that I could make my sea(4) scsi adapter work more
reliably than any variant of usb wi(4), so perhaps we should disable usb
wi(4) to save you time building instead?
My 2 cents.
Nuke tcic0 *and* pcic*:
* searching archives bring dmesgs
Alexey E. Suslikov alexey.suslikov at gmail.com writes:
Not sure about ancient 3Com's, but they are Ethernet at
least, in contract to Token-Ring device like tr*.
Do we support Token-Ring?
Joystick driver?
If I'm testing hardware support and such, I'm going to want to get
thorough coverage of the drivers we build and purport to support.
Next time mail in your dmesg! :)
I'd wager a bet that I could make my sea(4) scsi adapter work more
reliably than any variant of usb wi(4), so perhaps we
On Mar 26, 2013, at 10:06 PM, Creamy cre...@nocrater.com wrote:
Looking to the future, when are we going to drop 486 support, anyway?
Now, that's a more interesting thing ask.
How much of the hardware survives now, anyway? I mean at least the old
Vaxen were, (and are), maintainable. 486
On Mar 26, 2013, at 11:11 PM, Creamy cre...@nocrater.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 10:50:40PM +0400, Franco Fichtner wrote:
Nobody in their right mind would have such a system as
mission critical infrastructure. :)
What, like using a Honeywell 316 as a nuclear power station
reactor
42 matches
Mail list logo
