From: "Talpey, Thomas" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] NFS: Update help text for CONFIG_NFS_FS Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 13:09:01 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20080518021241.8366.12464.stgit@ellison.1015granger.net> <20080518021614.8366.39102.stgit@ellison.1015granger.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org To: Chuck Lever Return-path: Received: from mx2.netapp.com ([216.240.18.37]:57003 "EHLO mx2.netapp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753162AbYESRI6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2008 13:08:58 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080518021614.8366.39102.stgit-ewv44WTpT0t9HhUboXbp9zCvJB+x5qRC@public.gmane.org> References: <20080518021241.8366.12464.stgit-ewv44WTpT0t9HhUboXbp9zCvJB+x5qRC@public.gmane.org> <20080518021614.8366.39102.stgit-ewv44WTpT0t9HhUboXbp9zCvJB+x5qRC@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: At 10:16 PM 5/17/2008, Chuck Lever wrote: >Clean up: refresh the help text for Kconfig items related to the NFS >client. Remove obsolete URLs, and make the language consistent among >the options. I like the patch for no other reason than (finally) getting rid of the CODA nasty-gram: >- A superior but less widely used alternative to NFS is provided by >- the Coda file system; see "Coda file system support" below. But I do have a comment - I think calling it "Sun's" protocol is unnecessary. It's an IETF standard, and widely implemented. >+ Choose Y here if you want to access files residing on other >+ computers using Sun's Network File System protocol. To compile >+ this file system support as a module, choose M here: the module >+ will be called nfs. > config NFS_V3 >- bool "Provide NFSv3 client support" >+ bool "NFS client support for NFS version 3" The new option says NFS twice. > depends on NFS_FS > help >- Say Y here if you want your NFS client to be able to speak version >- 3 of the NFS protocol. >+ This option enables support for version 3 of the NFS protocol >+ (RFC 1813) in the kernel's NFS client. And twice again. > config NFS_V4 >- bool "Provide NFSv4 client support (EXPERIMENTAL)" >+ bool "NFS client support for NFS version 4 (EXPERIMENTAL)" > depends on NFS_FS && EXPERIMENTAL Is it necessary to say "(EXPERIMENTAL)"? There are many other kernel options that don't, but in fact are dependent. Tom.