Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965066AbXBEXVv (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Feb 2007 18:21:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965067AbXBEXVv (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Feb 2007 18:21:51 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:49386 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965066AbXBEXVu (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Feb 2007 18:21:50 -0500 Subject: Re: [patch] MTD: fix DOC2000/2001/2001PLUS build error From: David Woodhouse To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Randy Dunlap , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: References: <20070205084523.GA21858@elte.hu> <1170682488.29759.795.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <20070205155627.GA8354@elte.hu> <1170692539.29759.856.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <20070205162635.GA755@elte.hu> <20070205163152.GA2464@elte.hu> <1170710272.29759.894.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1170711587.29759.909.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <1170712393.29759.925.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <20070205143110.fca62b57.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 23:21:34 +0000 Message-Id: <1170717694.29759.941.camel@pmac.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.2.1 (2.8.2.1-3.fc6.dwmw2.1) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2319 Lines: 51 On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 15:09 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > I also feel that a lot of people are "advanced" in one area, but not > necessarily in another. The Netfilter example I gave was one such personal > gripe of mine. I just feel like I shouldn't need to care! Yeah, I have the > knowledge, but I *still* want to be baby-fed with just a simple "anybody > can understand it". The netfilter example is totally irrelevant here, since 'select' is neither necessary nor sufficient for that. Russell and I have both pointed that out to you already. > Why? You could *trivially* have a tool tell you. Make "xconfig" or > something just pop up a window saying "sorry, you can't disable SCSI, > because you've got ATA enabled, and ATA wants SCSI". > > What's the big deal, here? Mostly that for the benefit of users who really don't actually configure their own kernels at all, we're screwing over the people who _do_, and who want this to work like it always did: sed -i -e 's/CONFIG_I2C=.*/# CONFIG_I2C is not set/' .config make oldconfig Not only does that not work like it always did, but it's also _really_ hard to find out why, on occasion. You have to grep all over the tree to find the offending 'select' statement. The other reason that a bunch of us are objecting is because we seem to be doing this for very little real benefit -- if we wanted to pander to Aunt Tillie, we could have done it in the tools. As I said, that was working ten years ago. Maybe not merged back into your tree but working nonetheless. It's not rocket science. But Alan makes a reasonable suggestion -- we could work around this in the tools too. I think you're very misguided in optimising for the people who aren't likely to be configuring their own kernels anyway, but despite the fact that others seem to agree with me, I don't hold out much hope of changing your mind. If we can hack up the kconfig library to work around this bogosity by (optionally) treating all 'select' of visible symbols as 'depends on' instead, then I think that should actually work OK. -- dwmw2 - 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/