On Tue, 31 Aug 1999, Mark Murray wrote: > > >I'll be very happy to work with you on this one. > > > > Does it make sense to make src/crypto/sys for kernel code? > > (for IPsec we need crypto code *in kernel*). > > I wonder... > > There was a contrib/sys (where softupdates went), and that got moved > to sys/contrib. > > Perhaps something similar could be invented for src/crypto? We'd need > to make the distibution machinery understand that, but I don't see > too much a problem there. > > I have no strong feelings about src/crypto/sys or src/sys/crypto.
I would prefer src/sys/crypto. I tend to have a lot of kernel-only trees around for my work and the more self-contained they are the better. Moving softupdates into sys/crypto was a good thing (IMHO). -- Doug Rabson Mail: d...@nlsystems.com Nonlinear Systems Ltd. Phone: +44 181 442 9037 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
