Adrian Bunk wrote:
quoted text
> On Sun, Jan 06, 2008 at 01:35:21AM +0100, Stefan Richter wrote:
>> Adrian Bunk wrote:
>>> 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.
>> What is an implementation detail and what is not?  In the end,
>> everything that we configure in Kconfig is implementation details.
> 
> With the use case "system administrator" we can expect people to know 
> the name of their ethernet card and which filesystems they use, but we 
> should not bother them with the fact that their network card might 
> require the Sonics Silicon Backplane support.

I'm afraid this can't be put into practice.  (User says which hardware
and protocols he needs to be supported, scripts magically assemble a
suitable configuration.)

I think
  - sensibly modularize our software,
  - tell the user which software components there are,
  - what they are for,
  - how they depend on each other,
  - make it easy enough for the user to navigate in the dependency
    graph,
  - provide fundamental safeguards and checks for a proper software
    configuration
is the best we can do.
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- ---= --==-
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
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/