On Sat, 16 Jun 2001, Jarom=EDr Dolecek wrote:

> cgd@sibyte.com wrote:
> > Why be inconsistent?  i.e., if ntfs, adosfs, etc., can move, why not
> > ufs and nfs?
>=20
> It's mostly matter of convenience. The amount of changes within
> ufs/* is much bigger than for other filesystems. It would be hard
> to track down old issues if ufs/*/ or nfs moved. Also, I consider
> nfs and ufs/* critical enough to warrant location under sys/.

I agree that moving nfs and ufs might be harder (more changes) than some
of the others, but if we're going to move some filesystems, we really
should move all of them. What is critical about the location of ufs/* and
nfs/ (other than cvs history)?

Take care,

Bill