lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Oct]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: CONFIG_TINY
    On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 06:49:00PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
    > On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 10:24:05AM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
    > > Yes, and I'm saying that CONFIG_TINY shouldn't exist. It should be
    > > CONFIG_FINE_TUNE (or so), to allow anyone to fine tune the optimization
    > > level.
    > If the flexibility is wanted then it should be something like:
    > CONFIG_TINY_GCCOPTFLAG
    > default 2
    > It should be a string so the developer can choose freely the optimisation
    > level.

    Except that it has nothing to do with TINY.

    This is where the templates idea that Matt Porter has mentioned comes in
    nicely. Not just 'embedded' can make use of tweaks, everyone can. And
    the default template would be the defaults now, and can be tweaked
    easily (and maybe something to select a basic set of defaults, etc).

    --
    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 13:30    [W:4.462 / U:0.268 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site