On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 08:53 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
It's a very clever straw man, Linus, but it's still bogus. Not only do I
_agree_ about the firewall example, I've even implemented very similar
things already, of my own accord. I really do get it.
I don't claim that we shouldn't "be nice". You keep coming back to that
but it bears no relation to what I'm actually saying.
I claim that there are _better_ ways to do it than 'select'. I claim
that we can 'be nice' without actually screwing over the people who use
non-interactive config methods and need to turn stuff off. A number of
whom have spoken up already but are perhaps less quixotic than I am so
have given up on getting you to listen.
99% of the times I configure a kernel, it's in an RPM package. The
answer "you can use xconfig and press the question mark" isn't
wonderfully useful -- although having xconfig be the answer for those
who need the extra guidance that 'select' currently offers is perhaps a
more reasonable solution.
But it doesn't matter. I'll come up with a hack for the tools which make
them (optionally) treat 'select' of a user-visible option as if it was
just 'depends on'. And that should fix the problem.
--
dwmw2
-
