Subject: Re: The future of NetBSD
To: Marc G. Fournier <email@example.com>
From: Quentin Garnier <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/01/2006 00:52:45
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 07:28:29PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Gilles Chehade wrote:
> >Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> >>>I doubt that'll be productive -- NetBSD, FreeBSD and OpenBSD have all
> >>>different goals...
> >>Even at the kernel level? Look at device drivers and vendors as one=20
> >>example ... companies like adaptec have to write *one* device driver,=
> >>for, what, 50+ distributions of linux ... for us, they need to write on=
> >>for FreeBSD, one for NetBSD, one for OpenBSD, and *now* one for=20
> >>DragonflyBSD ... if we had *at least* a common API for that sort of=20
> >>stuff, it might be asier to get support at the vendor level, no?
> >How would a common API provide more support from the vendor ? What does=
> >the API have to do with releasing documentation ?
> I'd rather have Adaptec provide a source code driver for their cards=20
> directly, then have Scott Long have to fight with unavailability of=20
> documentation itself ... if the driver works, what do we need=20
> documentation for?
Have a read of the Broadcom-provided Linux drivers for their GigE
chips. You'll understand. Beware, it usually induce bleeding from
Quentin Garnier - email@example.com - cube@NetBSD.org
"When I find the controls, I'll go where I like, I'll know where I want
to be, but maybe for now I'll stay right here on a silent sea."
KT Tunstall, Silent Sea, Eye to the Telescope, 2004.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----