[lkml]   [2007]   [Feb]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch] MTD: fix DOC2000/2001/2001PLUS build error
On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 13:28 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Right. Because for MOST scsi drivers, it's obvious that they are SCSI to
> the user.

Really? Including the 'Scanner driver' card which arrived with my

Is that like the 'RAID' card which is obviously RAID to the user, and
not at all IDE?

> But if you cannot see that this is something TOTALLY DIFFERENT from USB
> storage, you're either being obtuse on purpose, or just incapable of
> understanding humans.
> We should NEVER have had "USB_STORAGE" depending on SCSI. It'sa BUG. It's
> a _stupid_ bug.
> We should have done what is sane:
> - make CONFIG_SCSI (as a "support the SCSI layer" be invisible to users,
> because it's not a user decision.
> - have a CONFIG_SCSI_DRIVER question for "do you want to be asked about
> SCSI drivers" (and which also does "select SCSI" for you)
> - make USB_STORAGE _also_ do the "select SCSI" thing.

Crap. What we should have done is fix the tools so that when you go to
enable USB_STORAGE, it either prompts you or automatically turns on
SCSI. I saw versions of our tcl xconfig a _decade_ ago which were
capable of this, but we never cared enough to merge it -- although I
_thought_ our new xconfig could do it these days.

> In other words, you seem to be totally unable to grasp my argument. You
> are arguing on TOTALLY IRRELEVANT TECHNICAL GROUNDS. That's not what the
> Kconfig language is about. The Kconfig language and rules are about HUMAN
> interaction.

Well that's a shame, because any sane person would realise that most
humans interact with kernel configuration only through a distribution.

> So next time you say something about Kconfig, ask yourself: "What question
> would a user want to see".
> Any other question is pretty much totally irrelevant, and your "don't use
> select" rule comes from your confusion that thinks that it's somehow about
> machines and technical issues. It's not.

No, really. Eric's Aunt Tillie can go screw herself backwards with a
chainsaw. I care about _my_ use of configuration, and mostly my
requirement is that I want to turn something _off_ either because it
doesn't work, or I want it modular so I can hack on it, or because I'm
trying to cut down kernel size and I don't want it.

The proliferation of 'select' has made that a _complete_ pain in the
wossname, apparently for the benefit of some hypothetical relative of a
gun nut, who doesn't actually care because in general she doesn't
configure her own kernel anyway.

Russell is right -- using 'select' just turns the problem backwards,
pessimising it for the _common_ case.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-02-05 22:43    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean