Re: Partitioning rethink

Tyler Dauwalder <tyler-cyCl/[email protected]> wrote:
> And while I'm thinking of it, Axel, can we add your modified version 
> of 
> the iso9660 add-on to the cvs=3F Also, do you mind if I move the 

Sure, but it will only work under R5 as of now :-)
And please don't be to harsh on me - it's really some kind of a hack ;-
))

> cpp.{h,cpp} files from BFS to somewhere more public so the rest of 
> the 
> kernel can share them=3F

Well, we can do it for now - if we'll find any problems with it at a 
later date, we can simply remove them again.
The most public location for the header would be os/drivers/, a less 
one private/kernel/. The cpp.cpp should probably be part of the src/
kernel/core directory, right=3F

> > And have Axel send you his
> > improved FS shell, in case he doesn't manage to check it in before. 
> > :-P
> Yes Axel, please do. :-)

Yeah, I think I'll just do; it doesn't matter too much if it can't be 
built from the start.

> > Similarly the other modules would get respective objects. With the
> > Axel may for instance object, that C++ in the module interface is 
> > not 
> > exactly something he likes -- which could be worked around by using 
> > ugly ;-) C structures instead -- or something else I don't think 
> > of, and
> > perhaps wouldn't have an answer to...
> Yeah, I like that idea. And C++ (or something very similar) works for 
> me. :-)

I am not completely against introducing C++ API in the kernel itself - 
but if we do, it *must* only be used for a specific case, and not be 
usable by any other kernel components.
We shouldn't force anyone to switch to C++ to use a kernel service 
right now.

Adios...
   Axel.