From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Dec 10 12:11:32 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id MAA14124
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 10 Dec 1997 12:11:32 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers)
Received: from whistle.com (s205m131.whistle.com [207.76.205.131])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14117
          for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 10 Dec 1997 12:11:27 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from archie@whistle.com)
Received: (from smap@localhost) by whistle.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id MAA13707; Wed, 10 Dec 1997 12:10:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bubba.whistle.com(207.76.205.7) by whistle.com via smap (V1.3)
	id sma013703; Wed Dec 10 12:10:33 1997
Received: (from archie@localhost) by bubba.whistle.com (8.8.5/8.6.12) id MAA19248; Wed, 10 Dec 1997 12:10:32 -0800 (PST)
From: Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com>
Message-Id: <199712102010.MAA19248@bubba.whistle.com>
Subject: Re: Why so many steps to build new kernel?
In-Reply-To: <m0xfrlj-000386C@enterprise.cs.unm.edu> from Chris Faehl at "Dec 10, 97 12:24:48 pm"
To: cfaehl@cs.unm.edu (Chris Faehl)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 12:10:32 -0800 (PST)
Cc: ksmm@cybercom.net, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Chris Faehl writes:
> > <RANT>
> > 
> > Why is it that every time somebody suggests making a script or GUI utility
> > to automate some boring but necessary UNIX process, all you guys who went
> > to school with Dennis Richie pop out and start complaining about how the
> > GUI is the greatest affront to computer science since the invention of the
> > transistor? 
> 
> What I see being suggested isn't anything that will help automate
> kernel config, but rather to simply replace sections with a pointy-clicky
> interface. That's hardly automation. 
> 
> Anyway, the biggest reason I can come up with AGAINST GUIs for kernel 
> configuration is the obscuration of the original, has-to-exist kernel
> config file. That is, the config file still has to exist, so why not 
> just muck about with it directly? 

So what's wrong with a GUI program that spits out kernel config files?
That's kindof what I envisioned.

-Archie

___________________________________________________________________________
Archie Cobbs   *   Whistle Communications, Inc.  *   http://www.whistle.com