On Mon, 20 Feb 2006, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> I disagree with you - it's obvious from the name of the config option
> (MTD_MS02NV) what the module will be called and people who compile
> their own kernels should know. More importantly, no other description
> in this Kconfig file mentions anything like this. However, since
> there seems to be no Kconfig "writing style", I guess it must as well
> be added. But I guess the MTD folks removed it for a reason.
I can't recall if I noticed it being removed and I have no idea who
removed it and why. I seem to have no access to the MTD CVS tree right
now, so I can't check the history of the file.
> Still NAK, i.e. should I send the following patch to the MTD list, or
> ok to remove?
Well, descriptions for some drivers mention how the module is going to be
called and others do not. I'd prefer too much information was available
rather than too little. I don't think people should be forced to chase
Makefiles trying to determine module names. I don't insist though -- I
fear the driver has too few users to care. ;-)
Maciej
|