On Tue, 7 Sep 1999, Peter Wemm wrote:
> Well, it seems Bruce objects to this.. I don't know why though. If
> he's concerned about loosing the tightly integrated sio<->isa stuff
> then I guess there could be an "osio" (old sio) or "isasio" or
> something driver that remains isa-specific. I could well imagine this
> could be important for older/slower machines.
Is he on the same page as the rest of us here? We're just talking about
the probe/attach bits, and anywhere else that makes use of isa_get_foo()
calls that could be handled via more abstract methods right?
I don't get this non-maintainence maintainer role here.
- Confused in Maryland.
--
| Matthew N. Dodd | '78 Datsun 280Z | '75 Volvo 164E | FreeBSD/NetBSD |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 2 x '84 Volvo 245DL | ix86,sparc,pmax |
| http://www.jurai.net/~winter | This Space For Rent | ISO8802.5 4ever |
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
