In article <87lne9cd21.fsf@redmail.redback.com> cgd@netbsd.org (Chris G. Demetriou) writes:
>If you're going in this direction, i think i believe:
>
>	internal
>	layer
>	remote
>	local (with ufs under here, along with the rest of the disk fses)
>
>remote and local are actually probably better put as "disk" and "network".

There are some implications of changing the layout:
	- many user programs will need to be modified to include the
	  correct headers
	- kernel sources will have to be moved

I personally like something like fs/ufs, fs/nfs, fs/ntfs... I don't
think that classify them further serves any useful purpose except
adding bytes to source files.

While we are at it, why don't we do the same for net?
	net/{inet,ccitt,atalk,iso,natm,ns}

Then we can break *all* userland programs that use the network.
But that is easily repairable by ln -s net/inet netinet in /usr/include

And finally, we can go the solaris direction and move all the fs related
commands into separate directories and leave only the central command
behind.

christos