Subject: Re: DAD verbosity
To: Darren Reed <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Chris G. Demetriou <email@example.com>
Date: 02/18/2000 10:34:31
Darren Reed <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> This seems messy to me.
It's certainly interesting. 8-)
> Would it be worthwhile adding a buffer,
> somewhere, which various parts could add information to and was
> printed out once the `configure' was complete ?
It might, but it's kinda hairy. I've not really thought about what it
would take to do that.
and, of course, that wouldn't solve the problem for any of the _other_
areas that use the calls like this... 8-)
> (I'm guessing,
> without RTFS'ing, that the function which prints out "sd0" also
> prints out the "\n").
oh, you wish it were that. 8-)
foo0 at bar0 loc X loc Y: some device info\n
A: printed by generic autoconfig code.
P: printed by parent device 'print' function if any.
D: printed by child device attach function.
then consider the messages you get when you have an unconfigured
device on a direct config bus:
usefuldevicename at bar0 loc X loc Y not configured\n
same meanings as above (and of course the " not configured\n") bit
won't get printed if there's no parent device print function.
Chris Demetriou - email@example.com - http://www.netbsd.org/People/Pages/cgd.html
Disclaimer: Not speaking for NetBSD, just expressing my own opinion.