In article <20100307.144736.420173476735197890.imp_at_bsdimp.com>, Warner Losh <imp_at_bsdimp.com> writes: >We don't have quite as many problems as the NetBSD/OpenBSD crowd in >this respect. They tend to define a new MACHIINE more often then we >have (or will). The need for sys/arch is less severe here than there >because we don't have 40 different MACHINEs. Even if we did, I cannot think of any compelling reason to make such a change (and I don't recall one ever being brought up in our entire history). If we had forty architecture directories in /sys, so what? Why should it matter to anyone? If we were talking about 100 architectures, I might feel differently, but in this universe, we have, what? eight? And there are how many architectures currently in mass production? This whole discussion is ridiculous. -GAWollmanReceived on Mon Mar 08 2010 - 02:29:31 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:01 UTC