On February 7, 2002 11:13 pm, Mike Touloumtzis wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 11:09:09PM +0100, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > On February 7, 2002 10:41 pm, Mike Touloumtzis wrote:
> > > Adding configuration information to the kernel is a change to the status
> > > quo, and has a cost. The cost is small, but I'm unsympathetic to that
> > > argument because many small convenience features, each with a small cost,
> > > add up to a large cost.
> >
> > The cost is *zero* if you don't enable the option, is this concept difficult
> > for you?
>
> That argument can be used to justify almost anything. But it's not
> zero maintenance cost or code complexity cost. No one wants the kernel
> to be an unmaintainable nest of CONFIG_FOO and #ifdef BAR because of
> "zero cost" options.
OK, there we are, your real argument: you think adding this option will make
the kernel unmaintainable.
feh.
-- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 07 2002 - 21:01:08 EST