organization

[mohamed aslan]

guys this is not a flame war
but the linux way in arranging the source file is really better than
freebsd way, it's a fact.
however it's easy to rearrange it in 1 min as someone said before.
but i mean this step should be done from the core team.
for example all fs has to go in a subdir called fs
arch specific file should go in subdir called arch/(arch name)
and so on .
if ls the files in freebsd sys subdir , u will got about 54 subdirs
and a makefile while linux contains about 15 subdirs only.

guys, don't take my words against bsd , i admit that the performace of
bsd is much better than linux and i'm planning to change to it as my
primary os. but we can get the good things from linux and through out
the bad ones.


On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 18:39:14 -0300, Patrick Tracanelli
<eksffa at freebsdbrasil.com.br> wrote:
> Hey there Mohamed, hello.
> 
> I did not take it as a flame war initiative nor reason for such a thing.
> This kind of consideration is good to make people think about some
> points which are rarerely discussed. I personally disagree w/ you but it
> is also my very personal opinion.
> 
> Anyway, this is not the reason I am emailing you now.
> 
> You reply came to me only, since the list does not change the reply-to
> header you should retype the address or Reply All. I think your points
> should go on the list, so resend it there if it is the case.
> 
> I am considering you really intended to reply to the list. If its not
> the case and you wanted to reply only to me, do not consider this message.
> 
> Thanks, Bye :-)
> 
> mohamed aslan wrote:
> > guys this is not a flame war
> > but the linux way in arranging the source file is really better than
> > freebsd way, it's a fact.
> > however it's easy to rearrange it in 1 min as someone said before.
> > but i mean this step should be done from the core team.
> > for example all fs has to go in a subdir called fs
> > arch specific file should go in subdir called arch/(arch name)
> > and so on .
> > if ls the files in freebsd sys subdir , u will got about 54 subdirs
> > and a makefile while linux contains about 15 subdirs only.
> >
> > guys, don't take my words against bsd , i admit that the performace of
> > bsd is much better than linux and i'm planning to change to it as my
> > primary os. but we can get the good things from linux and through out
> > the bad ones.
> >
> > On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 16:26:12 -0300, Patrick Tracanelli
> > <eksffa at freebsdbrasil.com.br> wrote:
> >
> >>Maybe you are just more familiar to Linux kernel.
> >>
> >>I am not a kernel hacker, like you and many people here. But I usually
> >>read source codes, FreeBSD and also NetBSD and Linux, specially the
> >>areas where I am a particular curious. FreeBSD code organization is
> >>close to BSD's roots (you can get those Walnut Creek historical CDROM
> >>which has code for 4BSD and 386BSD to compare).
> >>
> >>I like FreeBSD orgaization better. Maybe you will disagree it for a
> >>thousand years, or one day find NetBSD approach better than both. In any
> >>case I am sure spending more time under FreeBSD's src/ won't make the
> >>organization such a deal that deserves this comment.
> >>
> >>mohamed aslan wrote:
> >>
> >>>hi guys
> >>>it's my first post here, BTW i was a linux hacker and linux kernel
> >>>mailing list member for 3 years.
> >>>
> >>>and i've a comment here , i think the freebsd kernel source files
> >>>aren't well organized as linux ones.
> >>
> >
> >
> 


-- 
I'm Searching For Perfection,
So Even If U Need Portability U've To Use Assembly ;-)
http://www.maslanlab.org