> [ ... what do we prefer ... ]
>
> If I had my way, it'd look like:
> % ls -R /sbin/fs
> cd9660		ffs		kernfs		lfs
> mfs		msdos		nfs		null
> portal		procfs		umap		union
> 
> /sbin/fs/cd9660:
> clri		dump		fsck		fstyp
> mount		newfs		restore		umount
> 
> /sbin/fs/ffs:
> clri		dump		fsck		fstyp
> mount		newfs		restore		umount
> 
> ...
> 
> If I want to add a new FS, I add /sbin/fs/$(NAME) and /lkm/$(NAME)_mod.o
> and it all just works.

I actually agree; I like this layout better, as well.

however, _THAT IS NOT THE POINT_.


If the question is "where should utility X go," then the answer is
currently obvious: /sbin/${util}_${fsname}.  That's the current
scheme, which was handed down from Berkeley.

The question "should things be reorganized into a better layout" is
entirely seperate.  The answer may be yes, or it may be no, but I
think it's most likely to be "it doesn't matter; it's just not that
important."  If you'd like to consider this question, please do...
but not in _my_ mailbox.  8-)


cgd