From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 12 Jan 2003 02:55:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 12 Jan 2003 02:55:35 -0500 Received: from pasmtp.tele.dk ([193.162.159.95]:63501 "EHLO pasmtp.tele.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 12 Jan 2003 02:55:34 -0500 Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 09:04:06 +0100 From: Sam Ravnborg To: "Robert P. J. Day" Cc: Linux kernel mailing list Subject: Re: more thoughts on kernel config organization Message-ID: <20030112080406.GA1006@mars.ravnborg.org> Mail-Followup-To: "Robert P. J. Day" , Linux kernel mailing list References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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. Sam