> > IMO, the kernel doesn't need to be any more verbose. It already
> > outputs sufficient information to diagnose the problem. Explanations
> > belong in the documentation, not in the kernel itself.
>
> If it was sufficient to diagnose the problem then why did they post to
> linux-kernel to get the problem resolved.
Because either they didn't understand the context (i.e. that the
message was referring to a specific device number), or they didn't
bother looking up the device number.
It isn't the kernel's job to work around either of these problems.
There was sufficient information there for several other people to be
able to diagnose the problem.
Should the kernel output the error message in every known language? If
it doesn't some people might not be able to diagnose the problem. Or
what about people who cannot read any language? Should the kernel
switch the graphics adaptor into a graphics mode and draw diagrams?
The only information that the kernel needs to provide is:
1. That an error occurred.
2. The type of error (even a code number would suffice).
3. Other data which is relevant to this specific error (in this case,
the device number).
Anything else doesn't need to go in the kernel. It can go into
separate documentation which doesn't occupy physical RAM the entire
time.
-- Glynn Clements <glynn@sensei.co.uk>
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/