USB vendore designations..

[Warner Losh]

From: Barry Bouwsma <freebsd-misuser at remove-NOSPAM-to-reply.NOSPAM.dyndns.dk>
Subject: Re: USB vendore designations..
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 21:23:18 +0100 (CET)

> > [[ NetBSD uses the form Foo and FreeBSD uses Foo Inc or Foo Electric ]]
> > : I would nnot consider the expanded definitions as
> > : progress.  I would not apply the patch.  I'm of the
> > : old school that thinks that even a few kB are worth
> > : saving. :)
> 
> > I agree.  In fact, I'm in the process of merging together the FreeBSD
> > and NetBSD usbdevs and one of the things I'm doing is removing the
> > extranious Inc, Electric, Technologies, etc where FreeBSD and NetBSD
> > conflict.
> 
> Are there several of us working to the same goal :-) ?
> 
> Thanks to the responses of all, I'm also going for the shorter-
> is-better school, and my work-so-far is available from
> https://NOSPAM.dyndns.dk/hacks/usbdevs/
> (sort by date for latest updates)

I think that it is going to take sepveral steps to get from here to
there.  Since I have CVS access to both FreeBSD and NetBSD, I can
directly make changes there.  Since I prefer smaller, more easily
tested patches to one big jumbo patch, I'd like to propose that we
harmonize strings first, as much as possible, before going after the
name changes.  I'd also like to do these in smaller batches so that
if there are problems, only small, specific changes can be backed
out.

I'd also like to merge more predictably.  Eg, I'd like to merge the
stuff that isn't in FreeBSD into NetBSD and vice versa and then go
after the conflicts.  Once that's done, do the same for OpenBSD's and
DFBSD's usbdevs.  This likely will take a couple of iterations, plus
vigilance to keep it in shape over time...

> This does not include any additions from OpenBSD yet.  As it is
> a work-in-progress, expect changes.

I've had strong encouragement from the OpenBSD folks to adopt their
short names.  I tend to agree with them...

> > In fact, I've thought about doing the same thing to the NetBSD file
> > where it is inconsistant, but so far haven't asked if that's OK.  I'd
> 
> See message <Pine.NEB.4.61.0412231224000.209 at localhost>
> in netbsd tech-kern a few days ago (also available at
> http://mail-index.NetBSD.org/tech-kern/2004/12/23/0008.html )
> for one developer's input into this.  I believe you're safe,
> particularly after learning the reasons.  Shorter is mostly
> better, in this case.

Yes.  Agreed.

> > also thought about merging the FreeBSD vendor/devices into NetBSD,
> > but that's a lot of extra bytes into the table...
> 
> Not too many, compared with what's missing from D/FBSD, and as it's
> used in NetBSD for devices without a driver, probably worth the bytes.

Well, only if USBVERBOSE is defined, just like on FreeBSD.

> On a completely different matter, unrelated to USB, but related
> to merging, since some of my code hacks to 4.x involve changes
> to miidevs, I tried merging in NetBSD's additions as well.
> Can I assume it's a laudable goal to try to keep text *devs
> databases consistent between the BSDen?

Generally, yes.  specifically for miidevs, pccarddevs and usbdevs.
All the other devs aren't common between all the BSDs.

Warner