mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Day <imipak@yahoo.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Linux network configuration option query
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 22:34:34 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051014053434.96559.qmail@web31506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> (raw)

Hi,

This may sound like a really dumb question, but would
anyone have any objection if I cleaned up the menu
options for the networking?

The options don't seem to be grouped by function and
some of the 802.11 options are outside of the general
options list altogether, although I would argue they
are NOT higher level than options in lower-level menus
from that point.

There are also far too many options in the main
networking options menu, some indented and some on
other pages, with no obvious pattern or organization.

(eg: IPSec options seem to be sprinkled through like
seasoning. The classifier options at the end seem very
related to the advanced routing and the netfilter
code, yet are dependent on the classifier API in the
QoS menu which doesn't obviously relate to Quality of
Service. The TCP optimizations -do- seem to offer
"Quality of Service", but are in their own menu set.
And so on.)

The biggest problem I can see with my proposal is that
it's likely to get up the collective noses of every
single Linux network coder, particularly if I start
shuffling classifier-related code around. The second
drawback is that it would make for a lot of changes
that would have no actual code value whatsoever and
would mostly benefit those who both rolled their own
kernels AND had untreated OCD.

I'm not fond of being fed to giant rats, so I'd rather
know what the prevaling view was on the network code
layout.



	
		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
http://mail.yahoo.com

                 reply	other threads:[~2005-10-14  5:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20051014053434.96559.qmail@web31506.mail.mud.yahoo.com \
    --to=imipak@yahoo.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®