From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Nov 14 05:45:16 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3DAF16A41F
	for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 05:45:16 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from scottl@samsco.org)
Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ACC443D45
	for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 05:45:15 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from scottl@samsco.org)
Received: from [192.168.254.11] (junior.samsco.home [192.168.254.11])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id jAE5ivbh057054;
	Sun, 13 Nov 2005 22:44:57 -0700 (MST)
	(envelope-from scottl@samsco.org)
Message-ID: <43782468.2090609@samsco.org>
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 22:45:12 -0700
From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050615
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
References: <a78074950511130858n73f50708jabfbb18fda1af84c@mail.gmail.com>
	<20051113.213041.53817299.imp@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <20051113.213041.53817299.imp@bsdimp.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed 
	version=3.1.0
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on pooker.samsco.org
Cc: delphij@gmail.com, delphij@delphij.net, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: RFC: Why not move kernel MD code to sys/arch/?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 05:45:16 -0000

M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <a78074950511130858n73f50708jabfbb18fda1af84c@mail.gmail.com>
>             Xin LI <delphij@gmail.com> writes:
> : Is there any reason that we have sys/i386 and not sys/arch/i386?  I
> : think the latter is a lot cleaner (and libpthread, etc. already has
> : their arch/[arch] directory on the other hand).
> 
> This discussion is 10 years too late.  There would be a huge amount of
> repo-churn that would happen.  Also, the inevitible bikeshed happens
> about totally reorganizing the kernel, which inevitably ends
> inconclusively.
> 
> I'd personally love to see it, but it would be extremely disruptive.
> 
> Warner

Well, it should have been done with alpha was added in 1998, so it's
only 7 years too late =-)  If we were to ever restart the repo like we
did with ncvs for FreeBSD 2.0, it could be done.  Otherwise, it is
too much pain and churn.

Scott