X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Received: by onstor-exch02.onstor.net 
	id <01C776D9.8158741B@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>; Wed, 4 Apr 2007 09:51:35 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C776D9.8158741B"
References: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E022156F4@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: documentation of changes to cougar branch
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 09:50:24 -0700
Message-ID: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E032587A0@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: documentation of changes to cougar branch
Thread-Index: Acd2TFR32zAh2vdOShCiCHvGtk0/dQAAW+xQACLkyQM=
From: "Richard Beck" <IMCEAEX-_O=ONSTOR_OU=FIRST+20ADMINISTRATIVE+20GROUP_CN=RECIPIENTS_CN=RICHARD+2EBECK@onstor.com>
To: "Larry Scheer" <larry.scheer@onstor.com>,
	"Andy Sharp" <andy.sharp@onstor.com>
Cc: "Tim Gardner" <tim.gardner@onstor.com>,
	"Maxim Kozlovsky" <maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C776D9.8158741B
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I currently have code only in /net, so wherever /net ends up, I'll be OK =
with it.
--Rich

-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Scheer
Sent: Tue 4/3/2007 6:02 PM
To: Andy Sharp
Cc: Tim Gardner; Maxim Kozlovsky; Richard Beck
Subject: RE: documentation of changes to cougar branch
=20
My initial check-in or two without review were just to get some of the =
Makefiles and rpms in place. I initially bolted stuff in place based on =
where some parts were in the current cougar branch, such as how the =
linux tree was currently laid out. I did this knowing much of it will =
change.

We need to review what the directory structure for your source should =
look like. The current linux directory structure was laid out by Dan =
Stein and I don't know if it still makes sense for you or Richard's =
stuff. This is what Dan laid out:

Linux/:
  arch/  drivers/  include/  init/  kernel/  net/

This appears to be a possible layout for the kernel sources and a =
possible area for shared code between nfx-tree and the kernel. This is =
where Richard's previous work on neteee is found. It can be reorganized =
to better suit our needs. If this looks like the layout you expect for =
your code then you should use these directories for your components and =
new ones if needed.

I added Pkgs/ and pkg-tools/ This made sense for the package stuff.

Pkgs contain the RPMs at this time and a place holder for debian =
packages but none are checked in. The directory pkg-tools contain =
checked-in versions of the tools you gave me that fetch and manipulate =
debian packages.

Max mentioned he doesn't like the location of the neteee includes. But I =
simply used what was there.

But to answer your REAL question, yes, I will document how things work, =
probably in a wiki page.

Larry


-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Sharp=20
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 5:01 PM
To: Larry Scheer
Cc: Tim Gardner; Maxim Kozlovsky
Subject: documentation of changes to cougar branch

Hi Larry,

You've checked in a number of changes and additions to the cougar
branch without review.  Consequently, nobody knows how the stuff you
checked in works, where it lives, what the operating theory is ... etc.

Could you write a _brief_ design document that captures all this
information?  Where things are checked in, how the makefiles work, and
so on?  Feel free to use whatever format makes you happy: wiki,
open-document-format, or plain text file.  ~:^)

That would be a big help.  I'm looking for somewhere to check in my
kernel bits, but I really don't know where to start.  This will help me
there but also in other things.

Thanks,

a


------_=_NextPart_001_01C776D9.8158741B
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
6.5.7652.24">
<TITLE>RE: documentation of changes to cougar branch</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>I currently have code only in /net, so wherever /net =
ends up, I'll be OK with it.<BR>
--Rich<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Larry Scheer<BR>
Sent: Tue 4/3/2007 6:02 PM<BR>
To: Andy Sharp<BR>
Cc: Tim Gardner; Maxim Kozlovsky; Richard Beck<BR>
Subject: RE: documentation of changes to cougar branch<BR>
<BR>
My initial check-in or two without review were just to get some of the =
Makefiles and rpms in place. I initially bolted stuff in place based on =
where some parts were in the current cougar branch, such as how the =
linux tree was currently laid out. I did this knowing much of it will =
change.<BR>
<BR>
We need to review what the directory structure for your source should =
look like. The current linux directory structure was laid out by Dan =
Stein and I don't know if it still makes sense for you or Richard's =
stuff. This is what Dan laid out:<BR>
<BR>
Linux/:<BR>
&nbsp; arch/&nbsp; drivers/&nbsp; include/&nbsp; init/&nbsp; =
kernel/&nbsp; net/<BR>
<BR>
This appears to be a possible layout for the kernel sources and a =
possible area for shared code between nfx-tree and the kernel. This is =
where Richard's previous work on neteee is found. It can be reorganized =
to better suit our needs. If this looks like the layout you expect for =
your code then you should use these directories for your components and =
new ones if needed.<BR>
<BR>
I added Pkgs/ and pkg-tools/ This made sense for the package stuff.<BR>
<BR>
Pkgs contain the RPMs at this time and a place holder for debian =
packages but none are checked in. The directory pkg-tools contain =
checked-in versions of the tools you gave me that fetch and manipulate =
debian packages.<BR>
<BR>
Max mentioned he doesn't like the location of the neteee includes. But I =
simply used what was there.<BR>
<BR>
But to answer your REAL question, yes, I will document how things work, =
probably in a wiki page.<BR>
<BR>
Larry<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Andy Sharp<BR>
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 5:01 PM<BR>
To: Larry Scheer<BR>
Cc: Tim Gardner; Maxim Kozlovsky<BR>
Subject: documentation of changes to cougar branch<BR>
<BR>
Hi Larry,<BR>
<BR>
You've checked in a number of changes and additions to the cougar<BR>
branch without review.&nbsp; Consequently, nobody knows how the stuff =
you<BR>
checked in works, where it lives, what the operating theory is ... =
etc.<BR>
<BR>
Could you write a _brief_ design document that captures all this<BR>
information?&nbsp; Where things are checked in, how the makefiles work, =
and<BR>
so on?&nbsp; Feel free to use whatever format makes you happy: wiki,<BR>
open-document-format, or plain text file.&nbsp; ~:^)<BR>
<BR>
That would be a big help.&nbsp; I'm looking for somewhere to check in =
my<BR>
kernel bits, but I really don't know where to start.&nbsp; This will =
help me<BR>
there but also in other things.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks,<BR>
<BR>
a<BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C776D9.8158741B--
