linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] USB Kconfig: Select SCSI for USB Mass Storage support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4780DE52.1090402@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date:	Sun, 06 Jan 2008 14:57:38 +0100
From:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
CC:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] USB Kconfig: Select SCSI for USB Mass Storage	support

Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 06, 2008 at 02:13:09PM +0100, Stefan Richter wrote:
>> Module autoloading is quite different.
> 
> Both are "hardware -> required kernel support" mappings.
> 
> I know that people don't like this idea since the CML2 discussions, but 
> there even don't seem to be any big problems if anyone wants to put all 
> the pieces together and assemble a suitable .config only based on the 
> autodetection tools of some distribution and without asking the user 
> any questions.

How to autodetect that the user is going to buy gadget xyz next week?
(OK, he can re-run autodetection then, although that's not a
particularly economic strategy.)

How to autodetect POSIX_MQUEUE, HZ_250, HOTPLUG_PCI, ...?

[...]
>> This /is/ what we are currently doing, not "worse than what we are
>> currently doing".  We
>>   - sensibly modularize our software,
>>   - tell the user which software components there are,
>>   - what they are for,
>>   - how they depend on each other,
>>   - make it easy enough for the user to navigate in the dependency
>>     graph,
>>   - provide fundamental safeguards and checks for a proper software
>>     configuration.  (Well, we actually walk on thin ice whenever we
>>     use the 'select' keyword.)
>> ...
> 
> You miss the fundamental point:
> 
> The vast majority of kconfig users are _not_ kernel hackers, and they 
> neither know nor want to know anything about kernel internals - they 
> just want to build a kernel suitable for their system.

I don't miss the point.  I just say what we realistically can do.  And I
might add, we should try hard to achieve good results in each of the
points I listed.

> You want to make an UI easier to use for the developers but harder to 
> use for the users, and that's a bad deal.

No, I don't.

(I have "worked" long enough in enduser support, and still am doing
support, to not have completely lost an eye for enduser needs.  Or so I
believe.)
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- ---= --==-
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/