lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Sep]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Automatic Configuration of a Kernel


    --- Emmanuel Fleury <fleury@cs.aau.dk> wrote:

    > Hi,
    >
    > Roman Zippel wrote:
    > >
    > > The basic problem is that maintaining the bulk of
    > autoconfig information
    > > in a separate file is not feasible, it would be a
    > nightmare to maintain.
    > > This means it would be better to integrate this
    > information into Kconfig
    > > and define interface so that external
    > program/scripts (preferably shell
    > > instead of perl) can use that to configure the
    > kernel.
    > >
    > > A simple example could look like this:
    > >
    > > config FOO
    > > bool "foo"
    > > def_auto y
    >
    > Why not directly having a direct reference to the
    > name of the script ?
    >
    > config FOO
    > bool "foo"
    > auto "detect-foo-script"
    >
    > Where you have a specific directory in
    > scripts/autoconfig/ where you
    > store the scripts. Each script output y, n or m.
    >
    > But, it means a hell of scripts (except if we can
    > pass arguments in the
    > auto field: auto "detect-foo-script card-XYZ
    > release-32-or-higher").


    To pass argument it is not a problem we do it like we
    passed the rules in the rules_list(see the function
    exec_rule in auto_conf.c ). The lex parser has to be
    expanded in that way that it gives everything written
    after "auto" to the autoconfig.

    config FOO
    bool "foo"
    auto "detect-foo-script"

    So the new programm will work like that:

    It goes through are the Kconfig as usual. For any
    Option that doesn't have any "auto" a '\n' will be
    given. If there is an "auto" it will execute the
    script that is written after it. I think it might work
    like that. Any suggestion??





    > This scheme seems much simpler to me (and yet not
    > restrictive at all).
    > Of course, each script might have to ask few
    > questions to the user as:
    > Do you want this FOO support ? [y/m/n]:
    >
    > Or (when no module option):
    > Do you want this FOO support ? [y/n]:

    If the script want to ask some question, what will be
    the difference if we write make config.


    __________________________________________________
    Do You Yahoo!?
    Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
    http://mail.yahoo.com
    -
    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: 2005-09-15 15:06    [W:0.024 / U:90.000 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site