Bruce M Simpson wrote: >On Tue, Apr 20, 2004 at 03:57:21PM +0400, Roman Kurakin wrote: > > >>Ok. If I don't have ISA at all, what is bad in idea to remove it from >>config file? >> >> > >The problem is that ISA and the i386 architecture are still intimately >involved. It's probably hidden away as something called LPC on yours. :-) > > Lets imaging that I don't know internals. Lets imaging that I am very young. I didn't see ISA bus ever in my life. I only know that it was :-) So I started to work with FreeBSD in a modern world, on a modern hardware. Why should I expect that modern code of modern operation system should use unmodern ISA that is dead. I understand how world is complex. But I dont see anything bad in this expectation. Especially from those who do not know details. I don't want to say that we surely need to remove those dependances. I only want to say that this is normal wish to remove device "isa" as a "hardware missing in my modern box", cause I open it and see nothing except PCI slots. (I know, by evolution of this theory we could came to the situation where we check out box and suddenly realize that we do not have npx device. :-) ) By the way, since we have many device entries that implicitly depend on others, we might wish to have some mechanism to check those dependances or even complete them as we complete packages list during installation. rik >BMS >_______________________________________________ >freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org" > > > >Received on Tue Apr 20 2004 - 05:07:01 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:51 UTC