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
