bootpd: reorganize to match NetBSD's layout

[kevans]

Summary

This is a little more logical of a layout, and makes it easier to
compare the two.

[imp]

LGTM, but I only looked at the makefiles. I didn't build it :)

libexec/bootp/Makefile.inc

6

tab?

[gbe]

LGTM for the man page parts.

[markj]

I have no objection, but why bother?

[kevans]

In D32234#727454, @markj wrote:

I have no objection, but why bother?

I had it used it immediately for determining if they did anything else when removing USE_BFUNCS, and I plan to revisit it later to pull over some other small wins to minimize the diff -r (K&R -> ANSI, a couple other bits)

[markj]

In D32234#727459, @kevans wrote:

In D32234#727454, @markj wrote:

I have no objection, but why bother?

I had it used it immediately for determining if they did anything else when removing USE_BFUNCS, and I plan to revisit it later to pull over some other small wins to minimize the diff -r (K&R -> ANSI, a couple other bits)

Oh sorry, I meant that more broadly: why bother sync'ing bootpd at all?

[kevans]

In D32234#727460, @markj wrote:

In D32234#727459, @kevans wrote:

In D32234#727454, @markj wrote:

I have no objection, but why bother?

I had it used it immediately for determining if they did anything else when removing USE_BFUNCS, and I plan to revisit it later to pull over some other small wins to minimize the diff -r (K&R -> ANSI, a couple other bits)

Oh sorry, I meant that more broadly: why bother sync'ing bootpd at all?

Oh, that I don't have a good answer for. I only cared enough to sync bits around USE_BFUNCS because I needed that out of the way and sync'ing to NetBSD is safer for me in particular since I don't have the capability to runtime test it.

[kevans]

I'm going to punt on this and just apply the follow-up; I likely won't get around to doing any in-depth comparisons for a while since I don't really use it, so let's avoid the churn.