Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758814AbYCDVo7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:44:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751295AbYCDVom (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:44:42 -0500 Received: from sovereign.computergmbh.de ([85.214.69.204]:43680 "EHLO sovereign.computergmbh.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751839AbYCDVol (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:44:41 -0500 Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 22:44:39 +0100 (CET) From: Jan Engelhardt To: sam@ravnborg.org cc: Andrew Morton , Pekka Enberg , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , mingo@elte.hu, vegard.nossum@gmail.com Subject: kernelprojects::menuconfig [was:Re: Google's Summer of Code?] In-Reply-To: <20080304121339.a3b2483f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Message-ID: References: <84144f020803041045i70bbb05l6983bd14c5bcc91a@mail.gmail.com> <84144f020803041155k222c13ecu13c8c9534ced87e5@mail.gmail.com> <20080304121339.a3b2483f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2783 Lines: 71 Hi Sam, On Mar 4 2008 12:13, Andrew Morton wrote: >"Pekka Enberg" wrote: > >> I am also wondering if such a high profile >> project as the kernel can get away with not having a "project ideas" >> list which would make things real easy for the administrator(s)... > >http://kernelnewbies.org/KernelProjects > ["""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 -- 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/