Subject: Re: Chip vs. card compatability
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Martijn van Buul <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/16/2006 18:28:32
It occurred to me that Jan Danielsson wrote in gmane.os.netbsd.general:
> (2) It's easier for end users. If I see that "FooMax 2000" works with
> NetBSD 3.0, then I just order a "FooMax 2000", regardless of what's on
> it. However, I've seen developers say things such as "remember that the
> chip XYZ123 has broken LBA48...". If the database is board based, this
> kind of information may escape users.
The problem is that this table is perpetually outdated. "new" products
come out on a daily basis, quite often nothing more than a rebadged version
of an existing card. At the same time, it wouldn't be the first time that
a product with the same name, model and make suddenly ends up having a
completely different chipset.
For example; take the card listing from ral(4). It's enormous, and it grows
at a quick pace - but at the same time I'm sure it lists only a portion of the
*complete* list of these cards.
The same applies to a lot of things; cheap USB2 cards, network cards, video
cards, etc. I'm a bit doubtful of the outcome; I'm afraid that a list like
this would list cards which are no longer supported, and leaves out supported