Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 28 Sep 1999 14:13:15 -0500 | From | Michael Elizabeth Chastain <> | Subject | Re: bug in 2.3.18ac9 net/Config.in |
| |
Hi Jes,
> I don't actually disagree that this specific case is a bug in the > Config.in file, however it annoys me to see over and over again how > the Config.in files are changed to get around stupidities in the menu > based config tools.
It doesn't make me happy either.
> Except that it requires that the people who write the patches actually > use these tools. There is no way I am going to waste time running > menuconfig/xconfig before shipping something.
These are supported features and I can't remove them from the kernel (much as I would like to simply kill xconfig).
The best I know how to do is write a common front end with a static parser. Then you would automatically get checking even with 'make config'.
> I am not arguing against the fact that a required keyword was missing, > that _is_ a bug. What I am pointing out is that it always seem to be > the menu based config tools that break things.
Go get 2.3.18ac9 and *run* "make config" on it and tell me if it works. I haven't, but I'd be really surprised if it did. Bash doesn't like missing "then" keywords either.
> If it is going to break the readability of the current Config.in, > .config and defconfig files then no thanks.
Ok, I don't need to talk to you any more, because even though lots of your criticism is valid, you haven't spent five minutes reading the *existing* documentation in Documentation/kbuild/config-language.txt, let alone looking at my new code.
Michael
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |