On Mon, 23 May 2005, randy_dunlap wrote:
> On Mon, 23 May 2005 17:53:53 -0700 Jeff Carr wrote:
>
> | The text for the USB_MON option is confusing as to what was intended.
> | (This was from linux-2.6.11-rc4-git7)
> |
> | Jeff
>
>
> | USB Monitor (USB_MON) [M/n/?] (NEW) ?
>
> Does simply changing this to
>
> USB Traffic Monitor (USB_MON) ...
>
> help? What would make it clear to you? Maybe add:
>
> This option has nothing to do with Video Displays or Monitor devices.
>
> also?
>
> It would help to be constructive in your message, not just saying
> "X is bad," but also say "here's what to do to fix it."
>
>
> | If you say Y here, a component which captures the USB traffic
> | between peripheral-specific drivers and HC drivers will be built.
> | The USB_MON is similar in spirit and may be compatible with Dave
> | Harding's USBMon.
> |
> | This is somewhat experimental at this time, but it should be safe,
> | as long as you aren't building this as a module and then removing it.
> |
> | If unsure, say Y. Do not say M.
> |
> | USB Monitor (USB_MON) [M/n/?] (NEW)
Two more aspects of this which might be confusing:
The text says the component is experimental, but then
recommends "If unsure, say Y". That's not a combination
one normally finds.
The text says "Do not say M", but then M is offered as
the default choice (!) and Y is not offered at all.
Alan Stern
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by Oracle Space Sweepstakes
Want to be the first software developer in space?
Enter now for the Oracle Space Sweepstakes!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7412&alloc_id=16344&op=click
_______________________________________________
[email protected]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
