Re: drivers/ide ?

From: Brian Gerst (bgerst@quark.vpplus.com)
Date: Mon Mar 06 2000 - 20:02:08 EST

Next message: Andrew Stanley-Jones: "Re: [PATCH] cisco-hdlc mode in syncppp.c"
Previous message: Khimenko Victor: "Re: If something is not stated in POSIX we should not bother even if 90%+ of Linux system out there using it ??"
In reply to: Jens Axboe: "Re: drivers/ide ?"
Next in thread: Andre Hedrick: "Re: drivers/ide ?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Jens Axboe wrote:
> Looking at the sparc cvs tree, it looks as if davem has some thoughts
> on that as well
>
> drivers/block/ide
> drivers/block/scsi
>
> and then a block/misc of some sort, I would think. The current
> structure is not very nice.

The current kernel directory structure is a result of many thing being
bolted on to the tree without much thought of future expansion.
Unfortunately, because of the inability of 'diff' and 'patch' to
identify and handle moved files in a sane manner, moving many files
around makes for giant patches.

Brian Gerst

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Andrew Stanley-Jones: "Re: [PATCH] cisco-hdlc mode in syncppp.c"
Previous message: Khimenko Victor: "Re: If something is not stated in POSIX we should not bother even if 90%+ of Linux system out there using it ??"
In reply to: Jens Axboe: "Re: drivers/ide ?"
Next in thread: Andre Hedrick: "Re: drivers/ide ?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 07 2000 - 21:00:21 EST