From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 22 10:47:34 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C26A16A417 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:47:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from max@love2party.net) Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.188]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB37F13C4B6 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:47:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from max@love2party.net) Received: from amd64.laiers.local (dslb-088-066-028-169.pools.arcor-ip.net [88.66.28.169]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrelayeu4) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0ML21M-1IjuoJ0nKZ-0002Dy; Mon, 22 Oct 2007 12:47:03 +0200 From: Max Laier Organization: FreeBSD To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 12:46:52 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: In-Reply-To: X-Face: ,,8R(x[kmU]tKN@>gtH1yQE4aslGdu+2]; R]*pL,U>^H?)gW@49@wdJ`H<=?utf-8?q?=25=7D*=5FBD=0A=09U=5For=3D=5CmOZf764=26nYj=3DJYbR1PW0ud?=>|!~,,CPC.1-D$FG@0h3#'5"k{V]a~.<=?utf-8?q?mZ=7D44=23Se=7Em=0A=09Fe=7E=5C=5DX5B=5D=5Fxj?=(ykz9QKMw_l0C2AQ]}Ym8)fU MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2660110.uE77fQ4EcL"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200710221247.01695.max@love2party.net> X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/NbQ5Py4+UpVzFJAPYWB/QZEgX9UKP6srCxoD gtnJNwvmqJSE5CI+bTKqqDkHIYEQOAJiW+DPlUtgDfpLfgDhmm +hf/moL5JCdksSXJ4zgi0bkHBnCsSmLDUXDr8AFeVY= Cc: Kip Macy Subject: Re: Should Xen be a sub-arch or a build option? X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:47:34 -0000 --nextPart2660110.uE77fQ4EcL Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Monday 22 October 2007, Kip Macy wrote: > Let me say in advance that this is not an invitation to discuss the > technical merits of xen. This is purely a request to discuss how one > would structure the tree were one to import it into CVS. > > Hypothetically speaking, if one were to import Xen support into CVS > what would be the best way to go about it? > > There are a number of choices when doing it as a sub-arch: > - A separate directory for i386 and amd64 > - sys/xen-i386 > - sys/xen-amd64 This is certainly the most traditional way to do it. The fact that the=20 xen ports will share (a lot of) code with their respective parent doesn't=20 change that - pc98 is the precedent here. As it would also allow us to=20 treat xen as any other architecture without having to spread hacks all=20 over the build tools. I'd like to see us moving towards a separate arch/ directory in the long=20 run, but that belongs - with the new VCS discussion - somewhere else. > There is also a question of where the drivers should be put. I propose > that they would be put under sys/dev/xen, so you would have e.g. > sys/dev/xen/xennet, sys/dev/xen/xenblk etc. The existence of these drivers are also a reason - to me at least - to=20 keep xen as a platform of its own. =2D-=20 /"\ Best regards, | mlaier@freebsd.org \ / Max Laier | ICQ #67774661 X http://pf4freebsd.love2party.net/ | mlaier@EFnet / \ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | Against HTML Mail and News --nextPart2660110.uE77fQ4EcL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBHHH+lXyyEoT62BG0RAr2NAJ4ybjENf9PU3X8Iypg93NkRkp0uFgCfVNol 0ZDrcggQ7mH2XGGXbT+J46A= =3s1t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2660110.uE77fQ4EcL--