I agree with what some others have said:  if we start moving stuff around
to conform to some new tree structure, then we should move everything.
otherwise we still have an inconsistent structure.

-Chuck


On Sat, Jun 16, 2001 at 10:23:26AM +0200, Jarom=7Fr 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/.