To: None <current-users@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Guenther Grau <Guenther.Grau@bk.bosch.de>
Date: 06/12/1997 10:42:18
I saw the Manuel Bouyer's implementation of the ext2fs has been commited
to the tree. I saw the he added an entry to the port-i386/GENERIC config
file, but to no other config files of other trees. Thus my question:
Is the ext2fs MD or is it MI?
If it is MI, then I'd like to repeat an earlier proposal:
Most of the ports have a std-config file, which is included in the other
config-files. Can we extend this scheme so that we have a std-file for
all architectures, which includes all options (commented out or not)
that are applicable to all ports? Thus a specific port file would look
like this (don't know the exact config syntax of hand, but you'll get
other options ...
That way things like the new ext2fs could have been added to the
std-config file and would have been available on all other ports.
No digging through the other port's config files needed to find out
it exists and can be used.
Please cc: me in your replies as I am not on current-users (to much
traffic :-( Maybe we can introduce a new mailing list
current-users-information-only or current-users-no-discussions?!
P.S.: All this applies equally well, even if ext2fs is indeed MD, as
there are a lot of other things which could be shared in a central
config-file. When did you last change sth. in the config files of all
P.P.S.: And before I forget: a big THANKS to Manuel Bouyer for his
implementation of mthe ext2fs (and of course for his other contributions
like ATAPI-support, which will hopefully be added soon, as well :-)