isofs/cd9660 -> relocate to fs/isofs/cd9660?
Scott Long
scottl at samsco.org
Fri Sep 29 09:54:05 PDT 2006
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.
Scott
More information about the freebsd-current
mailing list