From owner-freebsd-current Tue Jan 28 14:53:39 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 792A837B401; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:53:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from ns1.xcllnt.net (209-128-86-226.bayarea.net [209.128.86.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 923FA43E4A; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:53:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marcel@xcllnt.net) Received: from athlon.pn.xcllnt.net (athlon.pn.xcllnt.net [192.168.4.3]) by ns1.xcllnt.net (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h0SMrbMW066355; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:53:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marcel@piii.pn.xcllnt.net) Received: from athlon.pn.xcllnt.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by athlon.pn.xcllnt.net (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h0SMrbKm000714; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:53:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marcel@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net) Received: (from marcel@localhost) by athlon.pn.xcllnt.net (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id h0SMrZ6o000713; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:53:35 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:53:35 -0800 From: Marcel Moolenaar To: Juli Mallett Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Patch to teach config(8) about "platforms". Message-ID: <20030128225335.GB537@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> References: <20030125153116.A25743@FreeBSD.org> <20030128.233856.71130419.nyan@jp.FreeBSD.org> <20030128120830.A81856@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030128120830.A81856@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG [sorry -- dropping in the middle of the thread] On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 12:08:30PM -0800, Juli Mallett wrote: > > This approach is a really bad one architecturally, in my opinion. It means > there is a lot of duplication of what may all be VERY similar, and it means > that if we had say 5 platforms supported by the MIPS port (certainly this is > not a high number at all) that means there would be 5 directories under > src/sys... And none of them would be "mips" since we wouldn't be supporting > any hardware called "mips", that's just the general architecture. I tend to agree. > I just really would like things to be clean, and abstracted, and not waste > anyone's time. Why should we have to duplicate so much code? I'm not sure platform is the answer. We already have the distinction between MACHINE_ARCH and MACHINE and it looks to me that MACHINE can do what you try to achieve with platform. Why add a "platform" keyword to config(8) if we already have the "machine" keyword? -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message