> >>>>different from Tekram adapters. Btw, my Netgear FA311 board is not handled
> >>>>by the sis driver of linux-2.2.20 and my little finger tells me that it
> >>>>could be so given a few code addition.
> >>>Unless you have a really strange board I haven't seen, NetGear FA311 are
> >>>the natsemi DP83815/6 chips, handling by either "natsemi" or "fa311"
> >>>drivers, not "sis900" driver...
> >>sis900 and natsemi are similar, probably both could be handled with one
> >>e.g. freebsd has one driver for natsemi and sis900.
> >>But I'm not a big fan of huge drivers that handle multiple 99%
> >>compatible controllers and always break for one controller if you try to
> >>fix another controller, so I won't try to merge them.
> > So you would have preferred, for example, to have dozens of different
> > drivers for SYM53C8XX chips and probably as many for Adaptec aic7xxx ones.
> > And, probably, one set of different drivers per O/S. And why not one set
> > per O/S major version and even per adjacent ones of the same O/S.
> > Given all the different brands that use similar or compatibles chips, the
> > way you want drivers to be developped and maintained looks just
> > unrealistic to me.
> Jeff has intimate knowledge of the Tulip driver, one of the more complex
> drivers that supports a bazillion different cards. And also one of the hardest
> to get (and keep) working on all of the devices it seems....
> I think he has a very valid point....
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I caught the remark as a too general
May thanks for the efforts maintaining tulip drivers.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/