At Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:22:02 -0800, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: > > Rui Paulo <rpa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 1 Mar 2009, at 21:26, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > Luigi Rizzo wrote: > > >> Hi, > > >> I am planning to split netinet/ip_fw2.c in a number of smaller > > >> files to make it more manageable, and while i do this I would > > >> also like to move the files related to ipfw2 (namely ip_fw*c) > > >> to a better place. > > >> Any objection to moving them to sys/netinet/ipfw2 ? > > >> Also, I can't help noticing that sys/netinet/ contains 36 > > >> files related to sctp -- wouldn't it be the case to move > > >> them (perhaps with the exception of the userland headers) > > >> to a separate subdirectory ? > > > > > > for that matter it would be nice to put ALL teh protocols in > > > their own subdirectories. > > > > Yes, that would be the perfect scenario, but I don't think that's > > doable. > > > > SCTP can be moved because it hasn't matured enough to cause a > > "moving nightmare". > > Perhaps everything can be moved, if hardlinks or symlinks are > left in sys/netinet for those parts (mostly .h files, presumably) > which have too much legacy to be moved outright.
I do not believe we want to go down the path of doing links. I do think that moving protocols is OK, and SCTP is a good candidate. I have cc'd the maintainer in case he's not on a...@. As to the original question about ipfw, if it can e done cleanly then yes that's fine. Best, George _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
