spliting kernel ipfw source ? (also involves sctp)

[Robert Watson]

On Mon, 2 Mar 2009, Rui Paulo 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".
>
> I vote for "ipfw" like Sam, BTW.

I think massively rearranging things doesn't by us much in terms of beauty, 
but does give us a lot in terms of hassle, given current assumptions of 
alignment between the layout of /usr/include and the layout of /usr/src/sys. 
We'd need to introduce new explicit mappings to install include files in their 
old locations (which are required by applications), etc.  For a change with 
such a minor benefit, the hassle will be huge.  I'm fine with renaming the 
ipfw .c files and leaving in netinet, but let's not get carried away.

Robert N M Watson
Computer Laboratory
University of Cambridge