From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 18 04:39:45 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CB4716A4CE; Tue, 18 Jan 2005 04:39:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.lovett.com (core.lovett.com [216.168.8.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 428F843D48; Tue, 18 Jan 2005 04:39:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ade@FreeBSD.org) Received: from 68-116-59-22.or.charter.com ([68.116.59.22] helo=[10.21.91.5]) by mail.lovett.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD)) id 1Cql9d-000F4U-5i; Tue, 18 Jan 2005 04:39:45 +0000 Message-ID: <41EC9313.90008@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:39:47 -0800 From: Ade Lovett User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Macintosh/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Baldwin References: <20050117203818.GA29131@dragon.nuxi.com> <41EC7D01.2070107@freebsd.org> <20050118032436.GA5325@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <200501172235.34509.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <200501172235.34509.jhb@FreeBSD.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.89.5.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: Scott Long cc: freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [RFC] what to name linux 32-bit compat X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 04:39:45 -0000 John Baldwin wrote: > Actually, I think going the non-ambiguous route and using the fuller names > like that (now that I see it) is probably the best bet when there is more > than one possibility. If you're (plural) going to go for the fuller names, given that /compat, (or more likely /usr/compat), could be shared in a large environment, it may be wise to revisit completely the naming: /usr/compat/linux/-/... eg: linux/amd64-i386, linux/alpha-alpha {/usr}/compat/linux/proc could still easily exist for linprocfs, if required. hell, even linux-pc98-i386 should something like that ever exist. I'm purposely not extending things to differentiate between redhat, suse, etc., since I'm a firm believer that we should be choosing one, and exactly one, "linux distribution" for the linuxulator. The key point I guess I'm trying to make is that this particular problem is not really limited to amd64 vs. i386 (or even 64- vs. 32-bit), and probably needs a bit more widespread thinking before going with a solution. If things are going to change, let's at least get them right for all possible architectures we know of (and support) now, rather than specific hacks for one particular instantiation of FreeBSD. -aDe