[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)
On 07/08/2012 04:17 PM, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote:
> Bernd Ernesti <netbsd%lists.veego.de@localhost> wrote:
>>>> (I know there's an argument that if it's /kernel we could eventually
>>>> put other stuff in there as well besides modules; but all such uses
>>>> are so far entirely conjectural (not even to the stage of being
>>>> vaporware) so I think it's highly premature to plan for them at this
>>> Is there a reason to *not* go with /kernel, besides annoyance of it
>>> being similar to /kern? [..]
>> Please not /kernel as it was already mentioned, it is too similar to
>> /kern. Filename completion would be not easier if you want to use a
>> file from /kern.
> I do not really see that as a real problem. Slight annoyance - yes.
>> Either somewhere below /libdata or if you really want a new toplevel
>> directory then it could be /boot which was mentioned, so it match the
>> FreeBSD behaviour.
> Kernel modules are not just miscellaneous data blobs. As for matching,
> the same argument can apply to /kernel, which is matching Solaris (also,
> our modload/modstat/modunload utilities are ~matching Solaris/SunOS).
> There is not that much point in matching, however, as we use a different
> structure anyway.
I would prefer /kernel as it most closely describes what it is. In that
move it would be nice if /netbsd and /libdata/firmware would be moved in
there as well. At least for /netbsd this would be missleading if we go
with /modules eg.
Sure that /kern is a prefix is not that nice, but I don't mind.
What else beside firmware is in /libdata
Die mystischen Erklärungen gelten für tief;
die Wahrheit ist, dass sie noch nicht einmal oberflächlich sind.
-- Friedrich Nietzsche
[ Die Fröhliche Wissenschaft Buch 3, 126 ]
Main Index |
Thread Index |