Re: 4.1 Release....MIIBUS
> Would you ever want "miibus" even if you're NOT using any of > the cards that require it? > > I guess you might need it to be able to KLD load one of those > drivers.. ? But that's no argument becuse you could just have > a miibus.ko that was a dependency of those drivers. > > So why is it a separate option? For the same reason that eg. 'pci' is still a separate option. Config isn't smart enough to handle these dependancies. -- ... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his rivals and unfortunately opponents also. But not because people want to be opponents, rather because the tasks and relationships force people to take different points of view. [Dr. Fritz Todt] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: 4.1 Release....MIIBUS
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Archie Cobbs writes: : Warner Losh writes: : > : So why is it a separate option? : > : > because it is a driver. Why is pci a separate driver? While most : > computers have it, not all do. Likewise with miibus. : : Ah.. but this analogy is not exact, because (for example) : "device ed0" does not require PCI, wheras all of these miibus : drivers do.. "device xe" does require pccard, otherwise it fails. "device wi" requires pccard, but will silently fail if no pccard in kernel. : But you're probably right, since it's a driver maybe that's : a good enough reason. I think that it is a minor flaw in our config system. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: 4.1 Release....MIIBUS
Archie Cobbs writes: > But you're probably right, since it's a driver maybe that's > a good enough reason. ^^ Oops, meant "bus" instead of "driver" there.. -Archie ___ Archie Cobbs * Whistle Communications, Inc. * http://www.whistle.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: 4.1 Release....MIIBUS
Warner Losh writes: > : So why is it a separate option? > > because it is a driver. Why is pci a separate driver? While most > computers have it, not all do. Likewise with miibus. Ah.. but this analogy is not exact, because (for example) "device ed0" does not require PCI, wheras all of these miibus drivers do.. But you're probably right, since it's a driver maybe that's a good enough reason. -Archie ___ Archie Cobbs * Whistle Communications, Inc. * http://www.whistle.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: 4.1 Release....MIIBUS
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Archie Cobbs writes: : Warner Losh writes: : > : not marked. I noticed that 4.1 Release miibus is still not : > : marked as (required), is it no longer required, or is it still : > : not marked? I ahven't tried compiling it with miibus commented : > : out, I'm just assuming it's still required : > : > miibus is still required for any ethernet card with a mii. Which is : > basically all of them produced in the last few years. my trusty : > ne2000 doesn't need it :-) : : Would you ever want "miibus" even if you're NOT using any of : the cards that require it? No. : I guess you might need it to be able to KLD load one of those : drivers.. ? But that's no argument becuse you could just have : a miibus.ko that was a dependency of those drivers. Already does that. : So why is it a separate option? because it is a driver. Why is pci a separate driver? While most computers have it, not all do. Likewise with miibus. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: 4.1 Release....MIIBUS
Warner Losh writes: > : not marked. I noticed that 4.1 Release miibus is still not > : marked as (required), is it no longer required, or is it still > : not marked? I ahven't tried compiling it with miibus commented > : out, I'm just assuming it's still required > > miibus is still required for any ethernet card with a mii. Which is > basically all of them produced in the last few years. my trusty > ne2000 doesn't need it :-) Would you ever want "miibus" even if you're NOT using any of the cards that require it? I guess you might need it to be able to KLD load one of those drivers.. ? But that's no argument becuse you could just have a miibus.ko that was a dependency of those drivers. So why is it a separate option? -Archie ___ Archie Cobbs * Whistle Communications, Inc. * http://www.whistle.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: 4.1 Release....MIIBUS
In message <000901c00d15$014ef540$020a@development1> "Daryl Chance" writes: : I know that in 4.0 Release that miibus was required, though : not marked. I noticed that 4.1 Release miibus is still not : marked as (required), is it no longer required, or is it still : not marked? I ahven't tried compiling it with miibus commented : out, I'm just assuming it's still required miibus is still required for any ethernet card with a mii. Which is basically all of them produced in the last few years. my trusty ne2000 doesn't need it :-) Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: 4.1 Release....MIIBUS
Ok, thanks for clearing this up...I haven't tried it with my realtek cards, but I know the Netgear ones need it :). Thanks again, | Daryl Chance | I have made this letter longer then | | Valuedata, LLC | usual because I lacked the time to | | Memphis, TN| make it shorter. -- Blaise Pascal | - Original Message - From: "David Scheidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Daryl Chance" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "FreeBSD Hackers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 10:30 AM Subject: Re: 4.1 ReleaseMIIBUS > On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, Daryl Chance wrote: > > :Hi, > : > :I know that in 4.0 Release that miibus was required, though > :not marked. I noticed that 4.1 Release miibus is still not > :marked as (required), is it no longer required, or is it still > :not marked? I ahven't tried compiling it with miibus commented > :out, I'm just assuming it's still required > : > > MIIBUS is only required if you have an ethernet adapter that requires it. > If you try to include such a device, and not MIIBUS, I'm not at all suprised > that the compile fails. It is certainly possible to build a kernel without > MIIBUS, though. None of my fxp(4) equipped machines use it, for instance. > > > David > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: 4.1 Release....MIIBUS
On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, Daryl Chance wrote: :Hi, : :I know that in 4.0 Release that miibus was required, though :not marked. I noticed that 4.1 Release miibus is still not :marked as (required), is it no longer required, or is it still :not marked? I ahven't tried compiling it with miibus commented :out, I'm just assuming it's still required : MIIBUS is only required if you have an ethernet adapter that requires it. If you try to include such a device, and not MIIBUS, I'm not at all suprised that the compile fails. It is certainly possible to build a kernel without MIIBUS, though. None of my fxp(4) equipped machines use it, for instance. David To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
4.1 Release....MIIBUS
Hi, I know that in 4.0 Release that miibus was required, though not marked. I noticed that 4.1 Release miibus is still not marked as (required), is it no longer required, or is it still not marked? I ahven't tried compiling it with miibus commented out, I'm just assuming it's still required Thanks, | Daryl Chance | I have made this letter longer then | | Valuedata, LLC | usual because I lacked the time to | | Memphis, TN| make it shorter. -- Blaise Pascal | To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
