On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 10:41:46PM +0100, Martin Husemann wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 09:56:46PM +0100, Hubert Feyrer wrote:
> > Following the discussion here, the fix in that PR seems to be the best 
> > bet we have. If noone beats me to it, I'll commit it within the next few 
> > days and try to get it into the netbsd-2 and netbsd-3 branches. (It's 
> > already tested successfully on -current and netbsd-2).
> 
> This does not sound like a good idea to me. This kind of quirks do not
> scale and are gone for a reason. The problem should be properly analyzed
> instead. Too bad noone picked this up so far (in nearly a year), but
> after all this time I see no need to rush in a brute force hack now.

I agree that there is no need to rush, but I don't consider this
a "hack".

We have devices that react erroneously when given a specific command.
The correct solution is to not send the command, in particular because
the command does not make any sense (there is no spoon^Wdoor).

The method of choice to handle such device anomalies is a quirk flag.

-- 
                                Michael van Elst
Internet: mlelstv@serpens.de
                                "A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."