Am Montag, 1. Mai 2017, 21:37:32 CEST schrieb Kai Krakow: > Am Mon, 1 May 2017 16:01:13 +0100 > > schrieb Jorge Almeida <jjalme...@gmail.com>: [...] > > > Sure, they're somewhat optional, but they're a pretty useful kernel > > > feature. > > > > No arguing there. Still, it shouldn't be pushed. It's a bad sign.
Really, I think you should try not to read too much into that, and instead maybe consider that it's just a boilerplate statement that is generated by a helper function in linux-info.eclass ;-) . > Well, I think the wording can be discussed. But I think it's not too > bad: The Gentoo newbie/noob will simple follow the warning, enable it, > and that results in a suggested configuration with all features > possible. It saves developers from figuring out unexpected problems > later. If you know better, go for it, with all the consequences that > has... ;-) Yeah, I agree with this, though. It should be possible to extend the helper function to generate a different message for strictly optional kernel features, for example. However, perhaps it is simply the case that almost always the kernel features are a hard requirement, so that nobody has yet seen the need to extend it in such a way. *shrugs* HTH -- Marc Joliet -- "People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
