Re: SSB: No is not an answer

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>]

Em Sat, Dec 01, 2007 at 09:27:49PM +0100, Michael Buesch escreveu:
> On Saturday 01 December 2007 20:00:23 Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Sat, Dec 01, 2007 at 12:45:32PM -0500, John W. Linville escreveu:
> > > On Sat, Dec 01, 2007 at 03:17:44PM -0200, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > > Sonics Silicon Backplane support (SSB) [M/y/?] (NEW) n
> > > > 
> > > > Support for the Sonics Silicon Backplane bus.
> > > > You only need to enable this option, if you are
> > > > configuring a kernel for an embedded system with
> > > > this bus.
> > > > It will be auto-selected if needed in other
> > > > environments.
> > > > 
> > > > The module will be called ssb.
> > > > 
> > > > If unsure, say N.
> > > > 
> > > > Sonics Silicon Backplane support (SSB) [M/y/?] (NEW)
> > > 
> > > I think this is OK -- it isn't really offering the choice to say
> > > no anyway.  You must have turned-on B44 or B43(LEGACY) already?
> > > 
> > > So, your choice is merely whether to have it built-in or as a module.
> > 
> > Ok, so the comment on being unsure is wrong as we can't say N as
> > suggested :-)
> 
> Oh, come on... Read the _whole_ comment.

Oh well, if you think that it is OK, so be it, I found it confusing and
reported, you find it ok to suggest chosing 'N' when 'M' or 'y' are the
only possible answers. 

Perhaps telling that N is not a possible answer when B44 or B43 was
previously selected could help, up to you.

- Arnaldo