Re: [PATCH] Unify CONFIG_LBD and CONFIG_LSF handling

[Roman Zippel]

Hi,

On Tue, 20 Jun 2006, Matthew Wilcox wrote:

> 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?

How likely is it that someone who doesn't understand the question needs 
this option? I think N is a safe answer here.

bye, Roman
-
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/