Subject: Re: ral(4) / ural(4) in NetBSD 2.1 or 3.0 ?
To: Martijn van Buul <martijnb@atlas.ipv6.stack.nl>
From: Rui Paulo <rpaulo@NetBSD.org>
List: tech-net
Date: 08/25/2005 15:43:09
--24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 2005.08.25 08:44:43 +0000, Martijn van Buul wrote:
| It occurred to me that Martijn van Buul wrote in gmane.os.netbsd.devel.ne=
twork:
| > It occurred to me that Rui Paulo wrote in gmane.os.netbsd.devel.network:
| >> You don't need to bring me a backport, I guess I can do it myself. I j=
ust
| >> wanted someone to test it.
| >
| > I can offer a Cardbus ral for testing; machine is currently running 3.0=
_BETA
| > anyway, using iMil's earlier backport of the ral driver.
|=20
| And I know someone with a PCI ral card. I might be able to coax him into=
=20
| some testing, if required.

Great, are you sure they work fine under -current ? I have to agree with
Christos here (see the other thread). They don't seem (at least from the
CVS logs) to work fine for everyone... We should wait before backporting it
to 3.0.

		-- Rui Paulo

--24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFDDdj9ZPqyxs9FH4QRAsINAJ9zgL/GbBciEcqPiZsfikq+CQoMGwCggzfp
fAYCReJTphDiwirAB/NjgPo=
=rxBU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9--