Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263107AbTKESlu (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Nov 2003 13:41:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263088AbTKESlu (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Nov 2003 13:41:50 -0500 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:14764 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263107AbTKESjz (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Nov 2003 13:39:55 -0500 Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:39:23 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: Vojtech Pavlik cc: Matt , , Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [MOUSE] Alias for /dev/psaux In-Reply-To: <20031105180035.GB27922@ucw.cz> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1815 Lines: 46 On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Vojtech Pavlik wrote: > On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 09:36:28AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:> > > > The alternative approach is to _not_ try to autodetect and leave it in a > > sane default state - or at least leaving the detection to a minimum, but > > having sane ways of letting the user set the thing. > > Would sysfs be a sane enough way? I suspect sysfs would be a _good_ way to do it. I'm sure it could be screwed up too, but I don't think it would necessarily be wrong to be able to do echo imps2 > /sys/class/input/mouse/1/protocol echo 200 > /sys/class/input/mouse/1/rate or something similar. > I still would prefer to have the autodetect be enabled, because it works > for 99% of the cases and allow to set the mouse protocol manually > (either boot time or via sysfs) for the troublesome cases. I'm a big believer in having the "default behaviour" be as user-friendly as possible. I do not believe in the mantra "we should do as little as possible, and let the user set everything up". > If psmouse.o is a module, the installer of course can ask the user. I think that's a failure. For one thing, you need the module to even _let_ the user select the mouse type: you can't seriously expect installers for normal users to not run graphically and with a mouse already? In general, module parameters are _always_ a sign of failure. I don't know of a single one that can be considered a "good thing". They are sometimes required, but they should be required only for hardware that is just very fundamentally broken. Linus - 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/