From owner-freebsd-current Mon Aug 16 15:24:35 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (dingo.cdrom.com [204.216.28.145]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21097159EC for ; Mon, 16 Aug 1999 15:24:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA01159; Mon, 16 Aug 1999 15:17:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199908162217.PAA01159@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Poul-Henning Kamp Cc: Mike Smith , Andrzej Bialecki , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Q: Extending the sysctl MIB for Linuxulator variables In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 16 Aug 1999 23:47:55 +0200." <21672.934840075@critter.freebsd.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 15:17:54 -0700 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > >Given that "ABI" is a bit obscure, kern.compat is the only sensible > >choice. > > I think that is too obscure considering the exposure this will get. What "exposure"? It's a backend to a tuning interface for our ABI compatibility... > It doesn't really matter much what we feel about it, linux will be > a native and 100% normal binary format for us, if we try to > marginalize it we loose in perception. I don't see how organising the sysctl namespace in a tidy fashion constitutes "marginalising" anything. > We have things to make us posix compatible at the top level already, > I don't see why the linux stuff should live under the top level too. One wrong... > And as father of sysctl, I think this discussion needs to come to > a close rather than waste more bandwidth, so unless Mike can convince > us why "Adding anything at the top level would be a terrible mistake" > I think the conclusion is "linux.*" For the same reason that fattening any top-level namespace is a bad idea. I mean, why not just put all the Linux libraries in /lib where they expect to be? From the perspective of an integrated namespace, we've already made the wrong moves insofar as vm.* should be kern.vm.*, vfs.* should be kern.vfs.*, etc. Either the entire kernel namespace should have a presumed leading kern. (and the existing kern.* nodes need to move) or we should relocate stuff to reflect a more ubuquitous naming arrangement. (btw, you're not the "father" of sysctl. I might go for "perpetrator" or "culprit" though.) -- \\ The mind's the standard \\ Mike Smith \\ of the man. \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ -- Joseph Merrick \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message