From owner-freebsd-questions Tue May 13 16:35:54 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA24486 for questions-outgoing; Tue, 13 May 1997 16:35:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rosie.scsn.net (scsn.net [206.25.246.12]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA24481 for ; Tue, 13 May 1997 16:35:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cola68.scsn.net ([206.25.247.68]) by rosie.scsn.net (Post.Office MTA v3.0 release 0121 ID# 0-32322U5000L100S10000) with ESMTP id AAA158 for ; Tue, 13 May 1997 19:29:15 -0400 Received: (from root@localhost) by cola68.scsn.net (8.8.5/8.6.12) id TAA01703; Tue, 13 May 1997 19:35:34 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <19970513193534.42852@cola68.scsn.net> Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 19:35:34 -0400 From: "Donald J. Maddox" To: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD 2.1.7 and COMPAT_43 References: <19970513180141.36385@cola68.scsn.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.69 In-Reply-To: ; from Shawn Ramsey on Tue, May 13, 1997 at 04:14:41PM -0700 Reply-To: dmaddox@scsn.net Sender: owner-questions@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, May 13, 1997 at 04:14:41PM -0700, Shawn Ramsey wrote: > > This raises a question that I have often wondered about: > > > > Why are *required* parts of the system listed in the config file > > as _options_? > > > > I mean, if it's _required_, then it's *not* an _option_; and if it's an > > option, it's not required, right? > > > > It seems to me that this just serves to confuse new users. Why not remove > > these "required options" and include required functionality unconditionally? > > I think the [KEEP THIS!] sets it off(or should) that you shouldnt be > removing it. Especially if you don't know what it is for in the first > place. That does not address my question: Why are _requirements_ listed in the config file as _options_? Why are they listed in the config file *at all*? Since they represent required functionality, wouldn't it be better if those 'options' were included in the kernel build unconditionally? Don't you think that would save a lot of bandwith on this list caused by newbies who inadvertently left a mandatory 'option' out of their config? -- Donald J. Maddox (dmaddox@scsn.net)