Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: GSoC proposal, device driver glue code]

2007-03-26 Thread olafBuddenhagen
Hi, On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 10:49:40PM -0400, Barry deFreese wrote: > how hard would it be to generalize the "glue layer" and let us load > drivers as modules instead? Not sure what you mean. Generalize in what regard? -antrik- ___ Bug-hurd mailing

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: GSoC proposal, device driver glue code]

2007-03-23 Thread Barry deFreese
Richard Braun wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 05:58:57PM -0300, Matheus Morais wrote: I had learning a bit about Linux 2.6 device drivers and I share of the same opinion from syn. I could see a _lot_ of work to update the glue code. My question is, update to Linux 2.6 device drivers is more fe

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: GSoC proposal, device driver glue code]

2007-03-23 Thread Anastassios A. Nanos
at first, thank you all for you kind comments and for the time you spent reading my proposal. I will try to be as precise as possible. Something missing in this proposal is how to deal with runtime changes, especially for USB devices. that's true. there are a lot of things missing mostly

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: GSoC proposal, device driver glue code]

2007-03-23 Thread Richard Braun
On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 05:58:57PM -0300, Matheus Morais wrote: > I had learning a bit about Linux 2.6 device drivers and I share of the same > opinion from syn. I could see a _lot_ of work to update the glue code. My > question is, update to Linux 2.6 device drivers is more feasible than write > a

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: GSoC proposal, device driver glue code]

2007-03-23 Thread Matheus Morais
On 3/23/07, Richard Braun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I like this proposal but I also have a question : did you consider BSD drivers ? I understand you have experience with Linux drivers, and this is a very good reason to work on a glue code for them, but from what I could see (at least this was

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: GSoC proposal, device driver glue code]

2007-03-23 Thread Richard Braun
On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 12:49:28AM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > Hello Okuji and Richard! > > May I ask you to have a look at the attached email and especially the url > referenced in there, ? > This application makes a rather profound impression t

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: GSoC proposal, device driver glue code]

2007-03-22 Thread Yoshinori K. Okuji
On Friday 23 March 2007 00:49, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > Hello Okuji and Richard! > > May I ask you to have a look at the attached email and especially the url > referenced in there, ? > This application makes a rather profound impression to me. > > Fe

GSoC proposal, device driver glue code

2007-03-22 Thread Anastassios A. Nanos
Hi there! This is my first mail to the list. I'm interested in submitting an application to GSoC for the Hurd project concerning the device driver glue code. The proposal is @ http://www.cslab.ntua.gr/~ananos/proposal.html my first try for the abstract produced this: The GNU/Hurd running on t