Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-08 Thread Mindaugas Rasiukevicius
Jean-Yves Migeon wrote: > On 08.07.2012 16:34, Lars Heidieker wrote: > > I would prefer /kernel as it most closely describes what it is. In that > > move it would be nice if /netbsd and /libdata/firmware would be moved in > > there as well. At least for /netbsd this would be missleading if we go >

Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-08 Thread Jean-Yves Migeon
On 08.07.2012 16:34, Lars Heidieker wrote: > I would prefer /kernel as it most closely describes what it is. In that > move it would be nice if /netbsd and /libdata/firmware would be moved in > there as well. At least for /netbsd this would be missleading if we go > with /modules eg. > Sure that /k

Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-08 Thread Warner Losh
On Jul 8, 2012, at 10:20 AM, Matthew Mondor wrote: > On Sun, 8 Jul 2012 17:57:00 +0200 > Edgar Fuß wrote: > >>> Please not /kernel as it was already mentioned, it is too similar to >>> /kern. >> What about /netbsd? E.g. /netbsd/6.0_BETA/{modules,kernel,firmware}. > > /netbsd/amd64/6.0/GENERIC/

Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-08 Thread Matthew Mondor
On Sun, 8 Jul 2012 17:57:00 +0200 Edgar Fuß wrote: > > Please not /kernel as it was already mentioned, it is too similar to > > /kern. > What about /netbsd? E.g. /netbsd/6.0_BETA/{modules,kernel,firmware}. /netbsd/amd64/6.0/GENERIC/{modules,kernel,firmware} :) ? But can the kernel easily detect

Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-08 Thread Edgar Fuß
> Please not /kernel as it was already mentioned, it is too similar to > /kern. What about /netbsd? E.g. /netbsd/6.0_BETA/{modules,kernel,firmware}.

Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-08 Thread Lars Heidieker
On 07/08/2012 04:17 PM, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: > Bernd Ernesti wrote: (I know there's an argument that if it's /kernel we could eventually put other stuff in there as well besides modules; but all such uses are so far entirely conjectural (not even to the stage of being

Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-08 Thread Mindaugas Rasiukevicius
Bernd Ernesti wrote: > > > (I know there's an argument that if it's /kernel we could eventually > > > put other stuff in there as well besides modules; but all such uses > > > are so far entirely conjectural (not even to the stage of being > > > vaporware) so I think it's highly premature to plan

Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-08 Thread Bernd Ernesti
On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 01:03:03PM +0100, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: > David Holland wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 07, 2012 at 08:57:10PM +0100, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: > > > Regarding the PR/38724, I propose to change the path to "/kernel/". > > > Can we reach some consensus quickly for net

Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-08 Thread Mindaugas Rasiukevicius
David Holland wrote: > On Sat, Jul 07, 2012 at 08:57:10PM +0100, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: > > Regarding the PR/38724, I propose to change the path to "/kernel/". > > Can we reach some consensus quickly for netbsd-6? > > If it's going to be a new toplevel directory, it should probably be >

Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-07 Thread Matthew Mondor
On Sat, 7 Jul 2012 20:54:12 -0600 Warner Losh wrote: > But it kinda fails with multiple kernels. On FreeBSD, we went with > /boot/$KERNNAME/kernel for the kernel, with all the modules associated with > it in /boot/$KERNNAME. By default, we load /boot/kernel/kernel and the loader > may also ch

Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-07 Thread Warner Losh
On Jul 7, 2012, at 4:17 PM, Matthew Mondor wrote: > On Sat, 07 Jul 2012 22:46:50 +0200 > Jean-Yves Migeon wrote: > >> On 07.07.2012 21:57, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> Regarding the PR/38724, I propose to change the path to "/kernel/". >>> Can we reach some consensus quick

Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-07 Thread Matthew Mondor
On Sat, 07 Jul 2012 22:46:50 +0200 Jean-Yves Migeon wrote: > On 07.07.2012 21:57, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Regarding the PR/38724, I propose to change the path to "/kernel/". > > Can we reach some consensus quickly for netbsd-6? > > /kernel is way to close to /kern, and

Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-07 Thread Mindaugas Rasiukevicius
Jukka Ruohonen wrote: > On Sat, Jul 07, 2012 at 08:57:10PM +0100, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: > > Regarding the PR/38724, I propose to change the path to "/kernel/". > > Can we reach some consensus quickly for netbsd-6? > > I'd vote for "/lib/modules" noted in the PR (or maybe under /libdata?)

Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-07 Thread David Holland
On Sat, Jul 07, 2012 at 08:57:10PM +0100, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: > Regarding the PR/38724, I propose to change the path to "/kernel/". > Can we reach some consensus quickly for netbsd-6? If it's going to be a new toplevel directory, it should probably be /modules. (I know there's an arg

Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-07 Thread Jean-Yves Migeon
On 07.07.2012 21:57, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: > Hello, > > Regarding the PR/38724, I propose to change the path to "/kernel/". > Can we reach some consensus quickly for netbsd-6? /kernel is way to close to /kern, and they serve different purposes. IMHO that will raise confusion. Technicall

Re: Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-07 Thread Jukka Ruohonen
On Sat, Jul 07, 2012 at 08:57:10PM +0100, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: > Regarding the PR/38724, I propose to change the path to "/kernel/". > Can we reach some consensus quickly for netbsd-6? I'd vote for "/lib/modules" noted in the PR (or maybe under /libdata?) simply because in my opinion the

Path to kernel modules (second attempt)

2012-07-07 Thread Mindaugas Rasiukevicius
Hello, Regarding the PR/38724, I propose to change the path to "/kernel/". Can we reach some consensus quickly for netbsd-6? Thanks. -- Mindaugas