Re: CONFIG_PNP: Please change the name

Andrew Mileski (dmtech@magi.com)
Mon, 18 Mar 1996 21:14:45 -0500 (EST)


>Am am interested in hardware PnP problems. I know the Win95 software
>is bad. I dont care about that. I thought maybe the original complaint
>was of a flaw in the spec. As far as poor hardware implementations, we
>wont be one of them.

Intel/Microsoft/et al. PnP specs comments:

1) The PnP-ISA design is clever, though I wish it was faster.

2) PnP-BIOS design leaves too many things as *optional*.

3) The PnP-COM spec is humourous - it is really tougher
than it has any need to be.

4) ESCD shouldn't be a separate a system as it is.

5) The PnP-BOOT spec is well thought out - a conforming
system would be neat (I've never seen - or heard of - one yet).

The more room you leave to wiggle in a spec, the more contingencies
you must plan for, and the more problems you'll have.

-- Andrew E. Mileski --
--------------------------------------------------------------
mailto:dmtech@magi.com http://www.redhat.com/~aem/
"The best programmers are lazy", so I'm told.
I haven't gotten around to seeing if it is true or not though.