Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 13:37:30 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: isofs/cd9660 -> relocate to fs/isofs/cd9660? Message-ID: <200610021337.30516.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20060929235459.M73166@fledge.watson.org> References: <451ADC21.50206@centtech.com> <200609291618.09492.jhb@freebsd.org> <20060929235459.M73166@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 29 September 2006 18:55, Robert Watson wrote: > > On Fri, 29 Sep 2006, John Baldwin wrote: > > >>>> Btw, this is a topic that is easily searched on, as it gets brought up > >>>> fairly regularly. We were a bit late on the schedule this time, though, > >>>> so thanks for giving it a kickstart. > >>> > >>> We've actually moved most of the filesystems into sys/fs in the past. > > Only > >>> cd9660, nfs, and ufs are in the top-level. I'd still say leave nfs and > > ufs > >>> alone, but sys/isofs/cd9660 -> sys/fs/cd9660 (I wouldn't keep the extra > > isofs > >>> directory) probably wouldn't be but so painful at this point. > >>> > >> > >> What about moving all of the net* directories into /sys/net?. And don't > >> forget putting i386 and friends into /sys/arch! Ah, I love the smell of > >> fresh paint in the morning. Smells like.... napalm. > > > > Baby steps aren't hard. :) Back when I first made rumblings about this sort > > of thing we didn't have a sys/fs at all, but now we do and over time we've > > actually moved most of our filesystems into it. :) > > The great thing about moving all the network subtrees around is how we can > break the compile of all the existing applications that include net/*, > netinet/*, netinet6/*, etc, all in one pass. :-) Yes. :( That's actually the biggest reason to not move net* IMO. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200610021337.30516.jhb>