> > I'm just suggesting here that it would be nice if the authors of
> > this code would make it _equally functional_ to what was removed.
> > It's not nice to remove functionality unconditionally and then
> > provide no replacement at all...
>
> That work is underway, and something to understand about -current
> is that it doesn't have to actually work at all times during the
> interim periods between releases. Now, should 4.0 be on the horizon
> and the situation still be one where "equivalent functionality"
> has not been provided by the newpcm driver, we'll revert back to
> the original luigi driver and continue the experiment in the new
> post-branch (5.0) current.
If that was only true. Or should I ask why didn't CAM from -3.3 get
reverted to the old scsi code before 3.3 was released. I have seen
no less than 2, and perhaps 3 people try to get cards that did work
under pre-CAM 3.x working under post-CAM 3.x. I know this is a slippery
slope, but it invalidates your above assertion that we revert back
at release when functionality has been lost due to new code.
I also know that we are a lot better off with CAM, and could care less
that the old ancient AIC drivers are dead, but some how I am also pretty
sure we won't be reverting back on newpcm, even if some old sound cards
don't work. It'll take the same arguement path that CAM did. ``This
is so much better, someone is working on getting that done, etc, etc..''
--
Rod Grimes - KD7CAX - (RWG25) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
