Re: [kbuild-devel] Re: CML2 design philosophy heads-up

Christoph Hellwig
2001-05-18T16:12:23Z

On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 12:04:34PM -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>:
> > > I don't want to do (a); it conflicts with my design objective of
> > > simplifying configuration enough that Aunt Tillie can do it. I won't
> > > do that unless I see a strong consensus that it's the only Right Thing.
> >
> > Its a good way of getting the defaults right. It may also be an appropriate
> > way of guiding presentation (eg putting the stuff the ruleset says you wont
> > have under a subcategory so you would see
> >
> >
> > CPU type
> > Devices
> > blah
> > blah
> > Other Options
> > IDE disk
> > Cardbus
>
> I want to understand what you're driving at here and I don't get it. What's
> the referent of "Its"? Are you saying you think Aunt Tillie's view of the
> world should guide the presentation of options?

Aunt Tillie shouldn't try to manually configure a kernel.

Christoph

P.S. _please_ shorten your .sig
--
Whip me. Beat me. Make me maintain AIX.