"Chris G. Demetriou" <cgd@pa.dec.com> writes:

> I don't know what it means, but it's wrong.  8-)  you should be able
> to specify multiple I/O space (and other) addresses for a single ISA
> device.  "hayesesp" doesn't provide an ISA bus, so the hierarchy above
> is ... not really sensible.

Like recently added `drq2', should we have `port2'?  But it seems that
it is not the point since you wrote as follows:

> While i'm at it, it really should be just:
> 
> hayesesp0 at isa0 port ....
> 
> I.e. no 'com' at all.

Do you mean that even if the card is operated in ns16x50 compatible
mode, it should be the device different from `com'?

> ("All this and more could be yours, if the 16x50 driver were ever
> made into a 'real' front-end/back-end -split driver!")

Also, do you mean that the chip independent front-end driver + ns16x50
back-end driver = `com', and the chip independent front-end driver +
Hayes ESP back-end driver = `hayesesp'?  If `Hayes ESP back-end
driver' drives the card in native enhanced mode, I think it is ok.
But is latter case written as follows?  The chip independent front-end
driver + ns16x50 back-end driver + Hayes ESP ns16x50 compatible mode
back-end driver (anyway, this result to `hayesesp' not `com'?).

enami.