[lkml]   [2001]   [Dec]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: State of the new config & build system
    On Fri, 28 Dec 2001 20:21:39 -0800, 
    Mike Castle <> wrote:
    >On Fri, Dec 28, 2001 at 10:58:03PM -0500, Legacy Fishtank wrote:
    >> s/break/update dependencies/
    >> I assumed this was blindingly obvious, but I guess not.
    >To YOU and other kernel hackers, yes.
    >But not to everyone.
    >Plus, as I understand it, it will be faster to:
    >apply a patch and rebuild with kbuild 2.5
    >than to:
    >apply a patch, make dep && make bzImage.

    As long as the patch does not change an include file that is used a
    lot, yes, a patch and make will be significantly faster using kbuild

    What Mr. Fishtank seems to overlook is that kbuild 2.5 is far more
    flexible and accurate than 2.4, including features that lots of people
    want, like separate source and object trees. Now that the overall
    kbuild design is correct, the core code can be rewritten for speed.
    And that will be done a couple of weeks after kbuild 2.5 goes into the
    kernel, then I expect kbuild 2.5 to be faster than kbuild 2.4 even on
    full builds.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:14    [W:0.027 / U:16.300 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site