Sascha Wildner wrote:
> Matthew Dillon schrieb:
>> I like the idea of putting it in a kernel module so we can have
>> the messages if we want them. I'm just trying to avoid source
>> duplication.
>
> OK, but still we have to be careful with removing/changing pcidevs file
> entries. They are not consistent across the different BSDs.
>
> Sascha
>
And what *is* cross-BSD consistent, these days?
Seriously - given that devices are one area still 100% driven by 'outside
world', eg: other-than OS developers [1], might it not be fertile ground for a
jointly-maintained pan-BSD device dataset?
Could save some labor and improve rate and accuracy of update - even where what
to *DO* with the information still goes by separate roads.
Bill
[1] Possible exception of Apple getting into custom silicon & firmware, as Sun
may soon cease to be silicon-involved, IBM & HP have long-since become
'specifiers' at best, commodity kit-builders more often - as with Dell.
What little 'bespoke' hardware remaons is of diminishing relevance, or even
visibility, to the *BSD's - or even non-fee Linux.