Subject: Re: kern/34085: "scsibus* at umass?" missing for GENERIC kernel
To: None <cube@NetBSD.org, gnats-admin@netbsd.org, netbsd-bugs@netbsd.org,>
From: Quentin Garnier <cube@cubidou.net>
List: netbsd-bugs
Date: 07/26/2006 11:10:02
The following reply was made to PR kern/34085; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Quentin Garnier <cube@cubidou.net>
To: Matthias Drochner <M.Drochner@fz-juelich.de>
Cc: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org, christianbiere@gmx.de
Subject: Re: kern/34085: "scsibus* at umass?" missing for GENERIC kernel
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 13:06:20 +0200
--YmemKvFH1mmyXPxa
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 12:48:59PM +0200, Matthias Drochner wrote:
>=20
> cube@cubidou.net said:
> > I'll probably fix scsibus.4, too, although it's interesting to have a
> > list somewhere of the devices that expose the scsi attribute, so it
> > does
> > make sense to have it that way.=20
>=20
> The problem here is that no documentation tells which devices
> provide the "scsi" interface attribute, so the "at scsi?"
> example would be completely without context.
The contents of scsi.4 and other config files proves that we can't
expect people to maintain it (not that I blame anyone--it just cannot
be done).
> Also in the kernel config files there is no logical chain
> between parent and child, but in this case the use of interface
> attributes is OK for efficiancy reasons. Users who want to
> wire down devices would revert to real device names.
This is nothing new. audio has been listed that way since 1.6, and
I don't remember seeing people complaining about that facts, save
maybe for adventurous users of adjustkernel; but those didn't
complain directly that you can't see the chain in the config file.
> Btw, the config(8) language sucks here - the should be
> no question mark in "at scsi?" because attributes are
> not counted like devices.
That's actually not that hard to fix. Requesting that interface
attributes should appear without a wildcard would be fine with me,
however it will bring a whole new kind of confusion for some users.
So, where and how do you think I should list providers of "scsi" and
"atapi"? In scsi.4 I guess, but I'm not sure of the form.
--=20
Quentin Garnier - cube@cubidou.net - cube@NetBSD.org
"When I find the controls, I'll go where I like, I'll know where I want
to be, but maybe for now I'll stay right here on a silent sea."
KT Tunstall, Silent Sea, Eye to the Telescope, 2004.
--YmemKvFH1mmyXPxa
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (NetBSD)
iQEVAwUBRMdMrNgoQloHrPnoAQJc3QgAgo7T/6ZaXBBCatucZaikgSQnOYCGhOFW
vIbka/5THAtzNEzRm0eeOPDD+KpP4WcPcdYHVV6GgDgk2AJEOVYz6LxOGekQ3jvK
Hw7nwzwc6+dUkcUQr2jfFMaB+oezL4iWV3rncEoInZ6MEzy7ZUDE9uCT9SB7LW2d
0dsEsLUE5zvG2gKLe895KsDvffGVTBXJfTv7J+8nls1y3b9cAV5CG4+dxeHDhEjC
cjZPvQVUOgqrQtbEe/rKAnK9jNdSllpx5fmGpEwTUond8yFjIeGstDuzzVWK2ezW
q5Z27Wj8LwfHkzC/WS6m0VnenCwS4fI3HY5EhXAosjswRH+ARf//AQ==
=+L5n
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--YmemKvFH1mmyXPxa--