Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 12 Jan 2003 04:22:10 -0500 (EST) | From | "Robert P. J. Day" <> | Subject | Re: more thoughts on kernel config organization |
| |
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 11, 2003 at 11:17:46PM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > how about something like > > > > ext2 > > ext3 > > reiser > > XFS > > JFS > > quotas > > MS/DOS related filesystems > > MD-DOS > > VFAT > > NTFS > > other OS-related filessytems > > Apple > > ADFS > > BeOS > > BFS > > QNX > > System V/XENIX/... > > Pseudo(?) filessytems > > /proc > > /dev/pts > > /dev > > I like the structure proposed above. I for myself has often wondered why > ext2 was not named ext2, and hidden between lots of less used stuff. > If you sort in alphabetic order, then be consistent. > > If you are going to reorganise fs/Kconfig I would suggest moving > ext3, reiserfs etc. specific stuff down in their respective directories, > and then source as appropriate. > There is no reason to keep that in a centralised placed, when it can > be distributed. > For simple (Kconfig wise) stuff like CODA or Intermezzo keep them > in fs/KConfig.
a couple hours ago, i posted an alternate fs/Kconfig file, but i haven't seen it appear on the mailing list. is there a size limit for postings? is there another way to make it available for anyone who wants to check it out?
rday
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |