On Sat, 27 May 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > I agree; why CAN'T we configure the linux kernel more like we do the
> > BSD ones? Their code and schema is very elegant and simple. And
>
> The BSD setup is not end user friendly. There is actually only one
> fundamental end user problem with our current setup. When a user says
> 'I want XYZ' it should turn on everything needed to get XYZ.
Of course, informing the user that it does so and *WHY* would be a good
idea too. Somewhat like dselect but without all the bugs and hassles
(dselect has a lot of them, hence I use apt-get instead.)
> If I hit my capture card option it should turn on i2c,
> video4linux,procfs, etc
Yup. Agreed... Then again, a thing I'd appreciate is something like
multiple configure universa. Thus, I could either choose a bus-view
(and be present by a hierarchy based on hardware) or a driver-type
(sorted on functionality) or a flat-view (alphabetical, for
instance) or... The possibilities are vast, but the complexities would
probably be overwhelming. I'd gladly be proven wrong here, though.
/David Weinehall
_ _
// David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\
// Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky //
\> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 31 2000 - 21:00:16 EST