spliting kernel ipfw source ? (also involves sctp)
George V. Neville-Neil
gnn at neville-neil.com
Mon Mar 2 08:50:06 PST 2009
At Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:22:02 -0800,
perryh at pluto.rain.com wrote:
> Rui Paulo <rpaulo at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 1 Mar 2009, at 21:26, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > > Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >> I am planning to split netinet/ip_fw2.c in a number of smaller
> > >> files to make it more manageable, and while i do this I would
> > >> also like to move the files related to ipfw2 (namely ip_fw*c)
> > >> to a better place.
> > >> Any objection to moving them to sys/netinet/ipfw2 ?
> > >> Also, I can't help noticing that sys/netinet/ contains 36
> > >> files related to sctp -- wouldn't it be the case to move
> > >> them (perhaps with the exception of the userland headers)
> > >> to a separate subdirectory ?
> > >
> > > for that matter it would be nice to put ALL teh protocols in
> > > their own subdirectories.
> > Yes, that would be the perfect scenario, but I don't think that's
> > doable.
> > SCTP can be moved because it hasn't matured enough to cause a
> > "moving nightmare".
> Perhaps everything can be moved, if hardlinks or symlinks are
> left in sys/netinet for those parts (mostly .h files, presumably)
> which have too much legacy to be moved outright.
I do not believe we want to go down the path of doing links. I do
think that moving protocols is OK, and SCTP is a good candidate. I
have cc'd the maintainer in case he's not on arch at .
As to the original question about ipfw, if it can e done cleanly then
yes that's fine.
More information about the freebsd-arch