> <<On Wed, 27 Jan 1999 18:30:15 -0500 (EST), Robert Watson > <rob...@cyrus.watson.org> said: > > > It's not clear to me, when thinking of introducing a new file (say, for > > auditing support :), what I should name it. Would it be kern_audit.c or > > sys_audit.c? > > Depends on what it is auditing. If it only auditing the basic I/O > operations, then it would go in sys_*.c. If it's a more general > kernel facility, then it goes in kern_*.c. > > > Or, if it is POSIX.1e, would it go into a /usr/src/sys/posix1e > > directory as the posix4 realtime stuff did (assuming that support > > for additional features from that posix draft were going to be > > forthcoming)? > > Giving the unhelpful tendency of Project 1003 to renumber its > standards after-the-fact (or fold them into the main 1003.1 document), > I would suggest against using committee identifiers like this.
This is posix4 due to my stupidity - I bought the O'Reilly "posix.4" book and changed the name to that even though I used to know better. I started with this in its own directory since it is supposed to be able to be enabled/disabled en masse via feature test macros, and because I wanted to keep all the posixy stuff in one place with calls out into the regular BSD kernel. Since the name is wrong, I think right thing to do now is make this directory something that means "posix_subsystem" and put similar chunks that follow similar rules there. That keeps the code associated with twisty standardized feature test macros in one place. Peter -- Peter Dufault (dufa...@hda.com) Realtime development, Machine control, HD Associates, Inc. Safety critical systems, Agency approval To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
