Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 17:27:29 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: isofs/cd9660 -> relocate to fs/isofs/cd9660? Message-ID: <200609271727.29775.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <451AE27F.3010506@samsco.org> References: <451ADC21.50206@centtech.com> <451AE27F.3010506@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200609271727.29775.jhb>