Re: [PATCH] Unify CONFIG_LBD and CONFIG_LSF handling

From: Matthew Wilcox
Date: Tue Jun 20 2006 - 10:51:16 EST


On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 04:20:53PM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2006, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > config LSF
> > bool "Support for Large Single Files"
> > - depends on X86 || (MIPS && 32BIT) || PPC32 || ARCH_S390_31 || SUPERH || UML
> > + depends on !64BIT
> > help
> > Say Y here if you want to be able to handle very large files (bigger
> > than 2TB), otherwise say N.
>
> While you're at it, could you please take care of bug #6719 and fix the
> LSF help text?
> Thanks.

I don't really understand the complaint. If <rare condition applies>,
say Y, otherwise say N. If unsure, say Y. The default is N. Perhaps
all that's needed is to spell out the implications of saying Y? How
about:

This option allows 32-bit systems to support files larger than
2 Terabytes, at a cost of increased kernel memory usage. Most
people do not need the overhead and should answer N to this
question, but if you do not understand this question, answering
Y is safest.

Or is that too verbose?

NB: Anyone suggesting that we should say "Tibibytes" instead of
Terabytes there will be hunted down and brutally slain. That is all.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/