===========
Userspace-driven configuration filesystem (EXPERIMENTAL) (CONFIGFS_FS)
[M/y/?] (NEW)
Both sysfs and configfs can and should exist together on the
same system. One is not a replacement for the other.
If unsure, say N.
===========
I think I'll say M - for now ;)
--alessandro
"Somehow all you ever need is, never really quite enough, you know"
(Bruce Springsteen - "Reno")
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 10:10:13PM +0100, Alessandro Suardi wrote:
> ===========
> Userspace-driven configuration filesystem (EXPERIMENTAL) (CONFIGFS_FS)
> [M/y/?] (NEW)
>
> Both sysfs and configfs can and should exist together on the
> same system. One is not a replacement for the other.
>
> If unsure, say N.
> ===========
>
> I think I'll say M - for now ;)
Sure, if you want to play with configfs you should. Most users probably
have no interest in helping develop/debug it, so the decomendation makes
perfect sense.
Len Sorensen
On 1/6/06, Lennart Sorensen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 10:10:13PM +0100, Alessandro Suardi wrote:
> > ===========
> > Userspace-driven configuration filesystem (EXPERIMENTAL) (CONFIGFS_FS)
> > [M/y/?] (NEW)
> >
> > Both sysfs and configfs can and should exist together on the
> > same system. One is not a replacement for the other.
> >
> > If unsure, say N.
> > ===========
> >
> > I think I'll say M - for now ;)
>
> Sure, if you want to play with configfs you should. Most users probably
> have no interest in helping develop/debug it, so the decomendation makes
> perfect sense.
--alessandro
"Somehow all you ever need is, never really quite enough, you know"
(Bruce Springsteen - "Reno")
On Jan 06, 2006, at 16:39, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 10:10:13PM +0100, Alessandro Suardi wrote:
>> ===========
>> Userspace-driven configuration filesystem (EXPERIMENTAL)
>> (CONFIGFS_FS)
>> [M/y/?] (NEW)
>>
>> Both sysfs and configfs can and should exist together on the same
>> system. One is not a replacement for the other.
>>
>> If unsure, say N.
>> ===========
>>
>> I think I'll say M - for now ;)
>
> Sure, if you want to play with configfs you should. Most users
> probably have no interest in helping develop/debug it, so the
> decomendation makes perfect sense.
I think his point is that his options are [M/y/?], (IE: No N), which
means that he's using something that depends on configfs. The
documentation should probably be updated to indicate that there are
such things.
Cheers,
Kyle Moffett
--
Simple things should be simple and complex things should be possible
-- Alan Kay
On 1/6/06, Lennart Sorensen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 10:10:13PM +0100, Alessandro Suardi wrote:
> > ===========
> > Userspace-driven configuration filesystem (EXPERIMENTAL) (CONFIGFS_FS)
> > [M/y/?] (NEW)
> >
> > Both sysfs and configfs can and should exist together on the
> > same system. One is not a replacement for the other.
> >
> > If unsure, say N.
> > ===========
> >
> > I think I'll say M - for now ;)
>
> Sure, if you want to play with configfs you should. Most users probably
> have no interest in helping develop/debug it, so the decomendation makes
> perfect sense.
[Sorry for the void message - fingers slipped]
The issue is that there is no way to follow the recommendation
in the help text. I don't want to play with configfs, but I just can't
select the N option - only M or Y. Hope this is clearer.
Thanks,
--alessandro
"Somehow all you ever need is, never really quite enough, you know"
(Bruce Springsteen - "Reno")
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 10:10:13PM +0100, Alessandro Suardi wrote:
> If unsure, say N.
> ===========
>
> I think I'll say M - for now ;)
If you choose something depending on CONFIGFS_FS, you of course
don't get the choice of 'N'. Here's a cleanup also available at
http://oss.oracle.com/git/ocfs2-dev.git
Joel
o Remove confusing help text.
Signed-off-by: Joel Becker <[email protected]>
---
fs/Kconfig | 2 --
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
a6bd5f413af39c5efb028766c1a032cded820a69
diff --git a/fs/Kconfig b/fs/Kconfig
index 382e3b2..7b80937 100644
--- a/fs/Kconfig
+++ b/fs/Kconfig
@@ -883,8 +883,6 @@ config CONFIGFS_FS
Both sysfs and configfs can and should exist together on the
same system. One is not a replacement for the other.
- If unsure, say N.
-
endmenu
menu "Miscellaneous filesystems"
--
1.0.6
--
Life's Little Instruction Book #306
"Take a nap on Sunday afternoons."
Joel Becker
Principal Software Developer
Oracle
E-mail: [email protected]
Phone: (650) 506-8127
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 10:10:13PM +0100, Alessandro Suardi wrote:
> ===========
> Userspace-driven configuration filesystem (EXPERIMENTAL) (CONFIGFS_FS)
> [M/y/?] (NEW)
>
> Both sysfs and configfs can and should exist together on the
> same system. One is not a replacement for the other.
>
> If unsure, say N.
> ===========
>
> I think I'll say M - for now ;)
If you turn of 'OCFS2', then you'll be able to deselect configfs.
Dave
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 02:30:32PM -0800, Joel Becker wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 10:10:13PM +0100, Alessandro Suardi wrote:
> > If unsure, say N.
> > ===========
> >
> > I think I'll say M - for now ;)
>
> If you choose something depending on CONFIGFS_FS, you of course
> don't get the choice of 'N'. Here's a cleanup also available at
> http://oss.oracle.com/git/ocfs2-dev.git
I don't know whether I already asked this question (if I did it seems
I've forgotten the answer...):
Why is CONFIGFS_FS a user-visible option?
> Joel
>...
cu
Adrian
--
"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
On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 11:09:59PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 02:30:32PM -0800, Joel Becker wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 10:10:13PM +0100, Alessandro Suardi wrote:
> > > If unsure, say N.
> > > ===========
> > >
> > > I think I'll say M - for now ;)
> >
> > If you choose something depending on CONFIGFS_FS, you of course
> > don't get the choice of 'N'. Here's a cleanup also available at
> > http://oss.oracle.com/git/ocfs2-dev.git
>
> I don't know whether I already asked this question (if I did it seems
> I've forgotten the answer...):
>
> Why is CONFIGFS_FS a user-visible option?
I think it should be the same as SYSFS, only changable from the EMBEDDED
portion.
thanks,
greg k-h
>> Why is CONFIGFS_FS a user-visible option?
>
>I think it should be the same as SYSFS, only changable from the EMBEDDED
>portion.
>
At its present state, no distribution uses configfs afaik, so I'd love to
have that turned off to not enlarge the kernel binary unnecessary.
Jan Engelhardt
--
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 12:48:03PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >> Why is CONFIGFS_FS a user-visible option?
> >
> >I think it should be the same as SYSFS, only changable from the EMBEDDED
> >portion.
> >
> At its present state, no distribution uses configfs afaik, so I'd love to
> have that turned off to not enlarge the kernel binary unnecessary.
Well, ocfs2 needs it, and as that just hit mainline, it's a bit unfair
to state that no distro uses it (and I think that it's even untrue, look
for the distros that ship ocfs2...)
thanks,
greg k-h
>> >> Why is CONFIGFS_FS a user-visible option?
>> >
>> >I think it should be the same as SYSFS, only changable from the EMBEDDED
>> >portion.
>> >
>> At its present state, no distribution uses configfs afaik, so I'd love to
>> have that turned off to not enlarge the kernel binary unnecessary.
>
>Well, ocfs2 needs it, and as that just hit mainline, it's a bit unfair
>to state that no distro uses it (and I think that it's even untrue, look
>for the distros that ship ocfs2...)
Well ok. What I mean is: I don't want to have configfs if I do not also
want ocfs2.
Jan Engelhardt
--
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 08:29:43PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> Well ok. What I mean is: I don't want to have configfs if I do not also
> want ocfs2.
While I can see where you are coming from, there are other
projects (not in-tree yet) that use configfs that may not use ocfs2.
Red Hat's cluster stuff plays with it, I think CKRM has as well. They
need the ability to select it without selecting ocfs2, and they are
definitely not EMBEDDED.
Is there any other way we can satisfy this?
Joel
--
"Maybe the time has drawn the faces I recall.
But things in this life change very slowly,
If they ever change at all."
Joel Becker
Principal Software Developer
Oracle
E-mail: [email protected]
Phone: (650) 506-8127
On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 12:54:30AM -0800, Joel Becker wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 08:29:43PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> > Well ok. What I mean is: I don't want to have configfs if I do not also
> > want ocfs2.
>
> While I can see where you are coming from, there are other
> projects (not in-tree yet) that use configfs that may not use ocfs2.
> Red Hat's cluster stuff plays with it, I think CKRM has as well. They
> need the ability to select it without selecting ocfs2, and they are
> definitely not EMBEDDED.
> Is there any other way we can satisfy this?
I don't really think there's a problem.
thanks,
greg k-h
On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 06:16:30PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 11:09:59PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 02:30:32PM -0800, Joel Becker wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 10:10:13PM +0100, Alessandro Suardi wrote:
> > > > If unsure, say N.
> > > > ===========
> > > >
> > > > I think I'll say M - for now ;)
> > >
> > > If you choose something depending on CONFIGFS_FS, you of course
> > > don't get the choice of 'N'. Here's a cleanup also available at
> > > http://oss.oracle.com/git/ocfs2-dev.git
> >
> > I don't know whether I already asked this question (if I did it seems
> > I've forgotten the answer...):
> >
> > Why is CONFIGFS_FS a user-visible option?
>
> I think it should be the same as SYSFS, only changable from the EMBEDDED
> portion.
No, my thoughts got in exactly the opposite direction:
It should not be available except when explicitely select'ed by a driver
with support for it.
But I got the point that an option is required for stuff not yet merged
into the kernel.
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
cu
Adrian
--
"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