On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 18:49:43 +0200 Rodolfo Zitellini <rwz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi! > I’ve been working on a new LocalTalk interface driver for the last couple months, do you think it would be possible to at least postpone the removal of LT a bit? > > It is a driver for an open source device called TashTalk (https://github.com/lampmerchant/tashtalk), which runs on a PIC micro that does all the LT interfacing, and communicates back via serial to the host system. My driver is relatively simple and works very well with netatalk 2.2 (which is still maintained and still has support for AppleTalk). The driver is basically complete and trsted and I was preparing to submit a patch. > > Still having LocalTalk in my view has many advantages for us enthusiasts that still want to bridge old machines to the current world without modifications, for example for printing on modern printers, netbooting, sharing files and even tcp/ip. All this basically works out of the box via the driver, Linux and available userspace tools (netatalk, macipgw). > > The old ISA cards supported by COPS were basically unobtanium even 20 years ago, but the solution of using a PIC and a serial port is very robust and much more furure-proof. We also already have a device that can interface a modern machine directly via USB to LocalTalk. > > The development of the TashTalk has been also extensively discussed on thr 68KMLA forum (https://68kmla.org/bb/index.php?threads/modtashtalk-lt0-driver-for-linux.45031/) > > I hope the decision to remove LocalTalk can be reconsidered at least for the time being so there is a chance to submit a new, modern device making use of this stack. > > Many Thanks, > Rodolfo Zitellini Does it really need it to be a kernel protocol stack? What about doing it in userspace or with BPF?
