On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 12:41 PM, matthew green <m...@eterna.com.au> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 6:49 AM, David Holland <dholland-t...@netbsd.org> > wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 06:22:17PM +0900, Masao Uebayashi wrote: > > > > > % grep ':.*,' sys/conf/files | wc -l > > > > > 86 > > > > > > > > And? I don't understand your point. There are a lot more than 86 > > > > entities in sys/conf/files. > > > > > > There are many instances where modules have multiple dependencies. > > > > And? I still don't understand your point. > > OK, then I may be misunderstanding what you meant by "diamonds". > > But anyway, never mind. I give up convincing you because this seems > to be never going to be constructive. I see no benefit in convincing > you. > > please keep going. > > i am yet to see any benefit to your ideas in this thread. you've > not given any good reason for breaking up files*.
To manage dependency nicely. When a module A dpend on B, you write "define A: B", where B has to be already "define"'ed in the current syntax. We're managing such ordering "by hand" in sys/conf/files. By splitting files & use "include", we don't need to manage such a mess by hand. David Holland already understood this: http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-kern/2010/03/11/msg007633.html So we have already agreed that split has "some" benefit. The point is, my split+include way doesn't need any syntax change. I'm not saying changing syntax is bad. My complaint is that David Holland is suggesting things without understanding the existing syntax. I spent a whole weekend to read sys/conf/files, ioconf.c, and module stubs in sys/dev/usb/uaudio.c. I wasted a whole weekend. I've been wasting more time to convince David Holland who has never bothered to understand the existing syntax. Masao