Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 22 Jul 2003 22:21:38 +0300 | From | michaelm <> | Subject | Re: Make menuconfig broken |
| |
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 11:00:31AM -0700, Samuel Flory wrote: > Is it too much to ask to make the defaults give us a working > console? Otherwise we will be answering the question of "why does > screen go blank after uncompressing" for the entire 2.6 cycle!!
I'm the 'beginner' that started the thread and I was wondering what *I* wanted to have in place. Well, I don't think the way the scripts work now should change, that would make an ugly newbiefication on something that works. On the other hand as already mentioned, 'if you need keyboard support at boot, then you just need to include keyboard support into the kernel' which I guess is a good way into pushing the use of some common sense. Also the problem is probably here partly because people are used to older kernel configs which brings two thoughts. Firstly, people who are compiling 2.5 are *supposed* to have some experience and secondly, people using 2.6 will eventually learn how to use the new features.
Some '*** WARNING:'s would the job without making the scripts too newbiefied IMO. Most linux end-users don't compile kernels in these days and the ones that do, prefer rawness.
- end of message - 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/
| |