On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 03:22:14PM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
quoted text
>...
> For Aunt Tillie cases, "select" makes sense.  For other cases,
> I'd argue that it makes sense for config users to know when they
> do something that causes an entire subsystem to be added to their
> kernel (like SCSI or NET).

We are not talking about Aunt Tillie [1] since she anyway does not build 
her own kernel.

The vast majority of kconfig users should be covered by the
"system administrator" use case. And for them it's a lot easier if they 
simply find the options for their hardware in the logical places without 
additional hassle.

Whether or not an option requires an additional subsystem like e.g. SCSI 
or SSB are hardware and implementation details we shouldn't bother 
kconfig users with.

cu
Adrian

[1] kconfig version of Godwin's law

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/