From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: To: 9fans@9fans.net Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 20:08:05 +0200 From: lucio@proxima.alt.za In-Reply-To: <2B3F3286-3140-4DE6-A5B3-3F9E32B70318@fastmail.fm> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] Scanners Topicbox-Message-UUID: a2b667ca-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > This may vary by device type, I think I > heard Linux framebuffer driver source was most useful to developers > of one OS. As a NetBSD user, I found the ISDN drivers in Linux considerably easier to read than the FreeBSD ones (NetBSD didn't include them at the time). I think NetBSD's philosophy of drawing a very clear boundary between machine-dependent and machine-indepndent comes closest to Plan 9; unfortunately, NetBSD is a bit more strict in its application: Plan 9 prefers the device drivers to be entirely in the machine-dependent space. Bottom line, both NetBSD and Plan 9 take their philosophy too far and neither can learn from the other. Which is why Linux drivers become the examples to follow :-) ++L