Re: [ANNOUNCE] GSoC project: Improving kconfig using a SAT solver

[david]

On Mon, 17 May 2010, James Bottomley wrote:

> On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 16:21 +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> > On 17 May 2010 15:21, James Bottomley
> >
> > Even if the problem is different from zypper's, it is also here
> > possible to get an unsatisfiable instance. You are right that, yes,
> > the kconfig files on their own should always be satisfiable. But
> > that's before the user has made any choices at all. An example of an
> > unsatisfiable instance would be one where the user demands that 1.
> > some USB driver is enabled, while 2. USB support in general is
> > disabled.
>
> Actually, these are two separate problems.  The first is basic
> consistency within the Kconfig subsytstem (something that select
> currently damages for us).  The second is what to present to the user,
> which is where the inception of the select problem came from.  A user
> doesn't really want to know that USB device X depends on usb storage,
> SCSI and a raft of other things ... they just want it to configure a
> kernel that supports their device.  In particular, we don't want to
> present every possible option to users and then try to work out a
> solution, we really need guided configuration (which, in some measure,
> is what we have today: if you don't select general USB, you won't see
> any USB drivers.  Or more importantly, if you select an Adaptec SCSI
> card, we just enable whichever transport library it needs).

There are two modes people can be in when configuring a kernel.

1. I want to configure a kernel to support my hardware, enable anything 
else needed to make it work.

2. I really care about having a small kernel, don't enable anything I have 
disabled (but help me figure out why something I want isn't available)

I don't think that hiding hardware from the user is ever the best thing to 
do. for approach #1 you obviously don't want to hide anything, but even 
for approach #2, someone may not realize that by disabling one option they 
are making it impossible to support something, and as someone who spent a 
bunch of time hunting through config to find options that I ended up 
finding were not available without enabling something else, I much prefer 
to see the option, but see it disabled rather than not being sure if it 
should be there, or somewhere else in the config.

David Lang
--
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/