Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 22:29:26 -0500 (EST) From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> To: imp@bsdimp.com Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: propose: all arch move into a separate dir Message-ID: <201003080329.o283TQIc011056@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <20100307.144736.420173476735197890.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <619814.37821.qm@web59102.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <7d6fde3d1003060128r46403703k8cead7f37f80e83a@mail.gmail.com> <20100307052949.GB70613@dragon.NUXI.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <20100307.144736.420173476735197890.imp@bsdimp.com>, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> writes: >We don't have quite as many problems as the NetBSD/OpenBSD crowd in >this respect. They tend to define a new MACHIINE more often then we >have (or will). The need for sys/arch is less severe here than there >because we don't have 40 different MACHINEs. Even if we did, I cannot think of any compelling reason to make such a change (and I don't recall one ever being brought up in our entire history). If we had forty architecture directories in /sys, so what? Why should it matter to anyone? If we were talking about 100 architectures, I might feel differently, but in this universe, we have, what? eight? And there are how many architectures currently in mass production? This whole discussion is ridiculous. -GAWollman
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201003080329.o283TQIc011056>