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. ScottReceived on Fri Sep 29 2006 - 14:54:05 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:00 UTC