In message <20050309145919.2fe77d6c@inishowen>Michael writes

>Hello,
>
>> I tried ppui.c and ppui.h from netbsd-ppbus.sourceforge.net with NetBSD 
>> 2.0. I'm not sure why the name is different, but it describes the same 
>> thing.
>Because 'ppi' is taken in NetBSD, although it's more or less hp300-specific:
>ppi0            at hpibbus0 slave 5 punit 0     # HP-IB plotter
>
>have fun
>Michael

If that's really the only use, I think in the long haul we'd be better
off by renaming the hp300-specific device to something else (hpibpp,
maybe?)  and thus preserving the FreeBSD name.  Conflicting web/Google
hits, confusion for users (and migrators, ) from to inconsistent
naming of the MI device between FreeBSD/NetBSD, usw.

A cross-citation in ppi(4) and arch/hp300/conf/GENERIC should fix any
confusion due to the name change. (fix files.hp300 en-passant; the the
only other use I noticed is commented-out in hp300/conf/INSTALL.  When
I used hp300s, nobody ran printers off models with hpib: that lousy
bus was already stretched to the limits with disks.  (did printers
work on high-speed hpib?  I doubt it).

(The hp300 device names predate any general idea of MI drivers using
new-config with separate front- and back-ends, bus-space(9),
bus-dma(9), etc.)

OTOH, thats not how we've usually done things...