lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Dec]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [kbuild-devel] Re: State of the new config & build system
On Fri, Dec 28, 2001 at 02:22:01AM +0100, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
>
> > That is such an unutterably horrible concept that the very tentacles
> > of Cthulhu himself must twitch in dread at the thought. The last thing
> > anyone sane wants to do is have to maintain two parallel build systems
> > at the same time.
>
> Funny, I could have sworn I read this was Keith's intention at least
> for a few pre's. Maybe I misinterpreted his intentions.

I think Keith wanted a very small time window tho (~24 hrs, barring big
supprises). But if we're going to be worried about the build time,
kbuild-2.5 and cml2 aren't co-dependant, yes? I know kbuild-2.5 works
w/o cml2, and last I tried (ages ago admitedly) cml2 didn't need
kbuild-2.5. So we could, in theory dump cml1 quickly but leave the old
Makefiles for a bit longer. Or if Keith thinks he can start on the
speed problems soon, just plod along for a few releases. :)

--
Tom Rini (TR1265)
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:14    [W:0.119 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site