Manuel BOUYER wrote:
> 
> It is MI (or if it is not it is a bug). I know it compiles on sparc and
> alpha, but it has only been tested on i386. So I only added it to
> arch/i386/GENERIC.
> Perhaps it should be added to other port's GENERIC too, but commented out ?
[...]
> > That way things like the new ext2fs could have been added to the
> > std-config file and would have been available on all other ports.
> > No digging through the other port's config files needed to find out
> > it exists and can be used.
> 
> EXT2FS is a bad example for that, because I don't think pmax, arm32
> or pc532 users want EXT2FS support by default in their kernel.
> 
> I don't think this is a good idea. We need a file with all the
> config options or devices for a port. If this file is not GENERIC, then
> you need to add the new option for all ports, plus <std-config>.
> I can't see a win here.

You said, that users of a specific port might not want to have 
the ext2fs in their kernel. I agree, but how about your own proposal
above: adding it to the <std-config> file I proposed, but commented out.
This would save you and other developers from adding an option to all 
GENERIC config files but still enable the user to easily find all the 
options they can use (Yes, I know that you can always do a "man 4
options",
but if you see the two included files, it's easier to find&access).

  Guenther