From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 29 16:54:05 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org 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 AFE7416A4E9; Fri, 29 Sep 2006 16:54:05 +0000 (UTC) (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 096934407C; Fri, 29 Sep 2006 16:41:16 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [10.10.3.185] ([165.236.175.187]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k8TGJQVQ031227; Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:19:32 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <451D4787.4050309@samsco.org> Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:19:19 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20060206 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Baldwin References: <451ADC21.50206@centtech.com> <451AE27F.3010506@samsco.org> <200609271727.29775.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200609271727.29775.jhb@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=3.8 tests=none autolearn=failed version=3.1.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.1 (2006-03-10) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: isofs/cd9660 -> relocate to fs/isofs/cd9660? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 16:54:05 -0000 John Baldwin wrote: > On Wednesday 27 September 2006 16:43, Scott Long wrote: > >>Eric Anderson wrote: >> >>>I noticed that cd9660 file system is in sys/isofs/cd9660 instead of what >>>seems more logical: sys/fs/cd9660. Is there any reason not to move it? >>> Curious mostly.. >>> >>>Eric >>> >>> >> >>Inertia, mostly. And if you move cd9660, do you also move ufs? Let the >>bi-yearly debate begin..... >> >>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. Scott