INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE in GENERIC
dougb at FreeBSD.org
Wed Jan 13 20:36:26 UTC 2010
On 1/13/2010 12:15 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 January 2010 1:48:38 pm Doug Barton wrote:
>> To address the other responses, Tom, sorry, your suggested text doesn't
>> address my concern. John, I don't think that users would somehow
>> magically know to look in NOTES for more information about an option
>> that is already in GENERIC.
> You really think users do not already know to look in manpages or NOTES to
> find out more details about kernel options?
That's not what I said.
> another way, what makes 'INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE' sufficiently special that it
> deserves special treatment relative to other kernel options?
Because the default behavior (not including the actual file) for the
option is contrary to user' reasonable expectation of how the option
should work .... and now I'm repeating myself.
Seriously, don't you have anything better to do than argue against
including a comment in a config file? I know I do. What is the
overwhelming horror that will arise here if there are more comments
GENERIC than you deem to be absolutely necessary?
And yes, I read the part of your message that I snipped about "why do we
have these documents if users don't read them?" The answer is, that's
why I'm suggesting a comment that tells users what man page to read.
Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso
More information about the svn-src-all