lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Aug]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Will 2.6 require Python for any configuration ? (CML2)
    On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 09:26:33PM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
    > >>>>> "Tom" == Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org> writes:
    >
    > Tom> On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 10:36:20AM -0500, Bob Glamm wrote:
    > Tom> And the same set of replies. Doing it in !python would be much
    > Tom> harder than it sounds. But people have stepped up and said
    > Tom> they'd do it in C. So python is only needed for xconfig. And
    > Tom> that's just trading tcl for python. The other thing is, the
    > Tom> python cml2 tools are supposed to eliminate a bunch of other
    > Tom> tools and remove some of the dependancies.
    >
    > Most of these tools were written in bash or C ... going the python way
    > is a major loss.
    >
    > >> Why isn't ncurses a pain? For the same reason ncurses wasn't a
    > >> pain when 'make menuconfig' (lxdialog) was introduced (yes, I did
    > >> many a 'make config'): curses/ncurses was already on just about
    > >> every system running Linux - it was built into the text editor.
    >
    > Tom> And many a new system has python.
    >
    > It still doesn't solve the situation of people building embedded
    > systems who do only have a bare minimum on their systems. Or people
    > who are bringing up systems who do not have network/floppy available
    > and do not want to move their disks between systems constantly in
    > order to configure their kernels. I have brought this point up
    > several times to the CML2 developer and every time I received the
    > utterly useless answer saying I should move my source to another box,
    > configure it there and move it back to the devel box.
    >
    > >> It does surprise me that Linus would actually allow this to happen.
    > >> It's been my impression that he favors a clean, elegant solution.
    > >> Maybe it's just me, but adding a dependency solely for the sake of
    > >> building the kernel doesn't strike me as very clean or elegant.
    >
    > Tom> Because the python solution happened to fix all of the problems.
    >
    > And introduces new problems that so far haven't been addressed.
    >
    > The solution seems to be that someone implements CML2 in C, once that
    > happens we are talking something completely different.

    Sounds like we have another volunteer here?!


    /David
    _ _
    // David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\
    // Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky //
    \> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </
    -
    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 12:58    [W:0.056 / U:0.340 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site