Re: Removing ARCNET stuffs
Robert Swindells <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.ports.amiga,gmane.os.netbsd.devel.kernel,gmane.os.netbsd.devel.network |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Radoslaw Kujawa <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 28 May 2015, at 10:30, Ryota Ozaki <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Frank Wille <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Thu, 28 May 2015 11:57:11 +0900 >>> Ryota Ozaki <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>>> As far as I can see Arcnet is only used by the Amiga bah(4) driver. >>>>> Isn't it possible to keep it somehow, as an MP-safe network stack would >>>>> be irrelevant for the Amiga platform? >>>> >>>> We could keep it with some pain, but we cannot keep it working if there is >>>> really no user. (I'm not sure if it works or not even now.) Is it still >>>> worthwhile? >>> >>> I will not insist in keeping it when there is pain to do so. And you may >>> be right that there is no user, but this is valid for a lot of platforms >>> and drivers. >>> >>> >>>> Anyway I don't proceed this attempt ignoring your request. >>>> I wish there were actual users though... >>> >>> Maybe we can wait for a few days to give more potential users the chance >>> to read these messages on the port-amiga list? >> >> Sure. I was a bit eager. >> >>> >>> In the meantime I will talk with other Amiga users if anybody owns such >>> a board. Probably is@ still got one, as he was working on the driver many >>> years ago. >> >> Thanks! >> >>> >>> When nothing happens and nobody is able to test it, we can remove the code. >> >> Okay, I'm waiting more. >There are companies still making PCI Express ARCnet interface cards, >hubs and converter devices: >http://www.ccontrols.com/arccontrol/nims.htm > >I'm not entirely sure that removing support for a standard that is >still actually used out in the world is a good idea. Maybe it is not >used much with NetBSD, since we only have amiga-specific driver. One >more downside, is that anything ARCnet related is rather expensive now >(around $400 for a single new PCI interface card). The same arguments might be made against the plan to remove ATM support. >I wish I had more free time... fixing ARCnet and implementing support >for newer interface cards seems like an interesting project. >Support for several legacy protocols was removed in recent years. I >fear that our networking stack is becoming more and more IP and >Ethernet centric. It isn't as bad as the Linux stack yet but I would also like to see a variety of protocols in the tree. Even if they don't always work I have found it useful to be able to look at other ways of doing stuff. I have been doing a bit of work on cleaning up some old Chaosnet and CAN code recently. Robert Swindells