kernelprojects::menuconfig [was:Re: Google's Summer of Code?]

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <sam@...>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...>, <torvalds@...>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...>, <mingo@...>, <vegard.nossum@...>
Date: Tuesday, March 4, 2008 - 5:44 pm

Hi Sam,


On Mar 4 2008 12:13, Andrew Morton wrote:

["""Update menuconfig to a modern ncurses look & feel

htop, aptitude, tig and other ncurses based programs has a more modern 
and effective look&feel than current menuconfig. Rip out all the 
lxdialog stuff and replace it with a ncurses based frontend that looks 
better and has more functionality."""]


I remember the last discussion about it, and I am still kinda in the 
position of "really?". I find the current menuconfig interface 
perfectable suitable.

I could not relate how menuconfig should look htop-style, because htop, 
for the most use, is just one screen with a process overview and a 
rather spartan "menu", should one decide to change some configuration 
options. Essentially it is a 4-column expand-to-the-right menu. No idea 
how to put it better.

aptitude. I only seen it very briefly since I do not use Debian. I can 
probably say the package selection in the OpenSolaris initial installer 
is similar, in other words, _all_ CONFIG options are listed in 
tree-style fashion in one window...

	> [ ] feature1
	  [ ] . . . feature2
	  [ ] . . . feature3
        > [ ] feature99

something like that. Anyway, I dislike the tree (expandable and 
contractable at will at the > points) — menuconfig seems superior
since, after entering a new submenu, just the options inside it are
displayed and nothing around it.

Then there are splitscreen approaches like qconfig/xconfig do, 
and I think I would not like that either for menuconfig; moving between 
two panels (one: the menu selection as a tree, the other: options for 
this submenu) is, kinda confusing in a text environment.

Of course there is a plus point for the tree-in-one (aptitude) approach 
in that searching for options/features is easier. The current menuconfig 
has a limited search function, for example, it will not take you to the 
option you searched but return to the menu you started the search from. 
Which means you have to repeatedly search for the option because you 
cannot remember the menus you have to go through to reach the option.

My stance: remain with the current menuconfig, and improve on the 
search(-and-jump) function.

Awaiting your counter-arguments and -opinions please.


thanks,
Jan
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Google's Summer of Code?, Pekka Enberg, (Tue Mar 4, 2:45 pm)
Re: Google's Summer of Code?, Avi Kivity, (Tue Mar 4, 4:51 pm)
Re: Google's Summer of Code?, Linus Torvalds, (Tue Mar 4, 3:35 pm)
Re: Google's Summer of Code?, Pekka Enberg, (Tue Mar 4, 3:55 pm)
Re: Google's Summer of Code?, Andrew Morton, (Tue Mar 4, 4:13 pm)
kernelprojects::menuconfig [was:Re: Google's Summer of Code?], Jan Engelhardt, (Tue Mar 4, 5:44 pm)
Re: Google's Summer of Code?, Andi Kleen, (Tue Mar 4, 4:38 pm)
text processing (Re: Google's Summer of Code?), Oleg Verych, (Tue Mar 4, 10:01 pm)
Re: Google's Summer of Code?, Alexey Zaytsev, (Tue Mar 4, 4:05 pm)
Re: Google's Summer of Code?, Rik van Riel, (Tue Mar 4, 4:23 pm)
Re: Google's Summer of Code?, Pekka Enberg, (Thu Mar 6, 4:36 am)
Re: Google's Summer of Code?, Giacomo A. Catenazzi, (Wed Mar 5, 9:57 am)
Re: Google's Summer of Code?, Romano Giannetti, (Wed Mar 5, 11:38 am)