Re: isofs/cd9660 -> relocate to fs/isofs/cd9660?

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