Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933100AbXBFAAc (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Feb 2007 19:00:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933102AbXBFAAc (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Feb 2007 19:00:32 -0500 Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:46737 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933100AbXBFAAb (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Feb 2007 19:00:31 -0500 Message-ID: <45C7C509.6090009@garzik.org> Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 19:00:09 -0500 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20061219) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds CC: Randy Dunlap , David Woodhouse , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [patch] MTD: fix DOC2000/2001/2001PLUS build error 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> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -4.3 (----) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.1.7 on srv5.dvmed.net summary: Content analysis details: (-4.3 points, 5.0 required) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1595 Lines: 36 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". It's a good example. I had a bear of a time with the netfilter kernel config on my firewall (w/ IPv6 goodness) box, when the generic netfilter stuff landed. For the first time in a long time, that firewall booted into a configuration that wouldn't forward+masq packets properly. > The same is true of the whole SATA/USB/SCSI thing. I know damn well that > the kernel uses the SCSI layer for USB and SATA, yet I feel that the ATA > layer does it right, and I just find the USB storage situation to be > *offensively* bad in this regard. Why the HELL does it have those big > comments and warnings, when it could just damn well enable SCSI support > itself? I think maybe ATA is just lucky. I allowed myself to get bullied into avoiding 'select', even though I feel the same way as you. ATA should select scsi-disk but doesn't, for example. And at some point it becomes a matter of taste: should ATA select BLOCK, or depend on BLOCK? There are IMO good arguments either way. Jeff - 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/