From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Aug 31 2:35:51 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from herring.nlsystems.com (nlsys.demon.co.uk [158.152.125.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11DF314C23; Tue, 31 Aug 1999 02:35:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dfr@nlsystems.com) Received: from salmon.nlsystems.com (salmon.nlsystems.com [10.0.0.3]) by herring.nlsystems.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA35003; Tue, 31 Aug 1999 10:33:50 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from dfr@nlsystems.com) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 10:33:50 +0100 (BST) From: Doug Rabson To: Mark Murray Cc: itojun@iijlab.net, core@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: KAME IPv6 and freebsd In-Reply-To: <199908310704.JAA34086@gratis.grondar.za> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 31 Aug 1999, Mark Murray wrote: > > >I'll be very happy to work with you on this one. > > > > Does it make sense to make src/crypto/sys for kernel code? > > (for IPsec we need crypto code *in kernel*). > > I wonder... > > There was a contrib/sys (where softupdates went), and that got moved > to sys/contrib. > > Perhaps something similar could be invented for src/crypto? We'd need > to make the distibution machinery understand that, but I don't see > too much a problem there. > > I have no strong feelings about src/crypto/sys or src/sys/crypto. I would prefer src/sys/crypto. I tend to have a lot of kernel-only trees around for my work and the more self-contained they are the better. Moving softupdates into sys/crypto was a good thing (IMHO). -- Doug Rabson Mail: dfr@nlsystems.com Nonlinear Systems Ltd. Phone: +44 181 442 9037 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message