Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 4 May 2008 10:47:08 +0300 | From | Adrian Bunk <> | Subject | Re: Ingo, no more kconfig patches |
| |
On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 11:54:11PM -0400, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > On Sun, 04 May 2008 01:03:30 +0300, Adrian Bunk said: > > On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 11:52:14PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > My larger point is that this kconfig tool bug breeds a constant stream > > > of avoidable breakages, which causes lost manpower and causes a stream > > > of trivial patches hindering maintainers all around the tree. Because > > > every such trivial patch has to be reviewed, tested, it clogs the commit > > > logs, etc. > > > > > > So the more trivial patches we _avoid_ having to do in the future, the > > > better. I'm not sure why you are even arguing against this this rather > > > simple point - your arguments are rather hard to understand. Wouldnt you > > > be happier if a whole category of trivial breakages was avoided and if > > > you didnt have to deal with and waste your time on that category of > > > trivial patches anymore? > > > > > > Most of the time reoccuring trivial patches are an indicator of some > > > deeper structural problem - as in this case. > > > > Your conclusions are based on an assumption that isn't true. > > > > "trivial patches" are the patches you send. > > > > But they are often bogus. > > > > Fixing these issues properly often requires a deeper understanding of > > both kconfig and the dependencies of the underlying code. > > I suspect that Ingo is however correct
Ingo claims the problem was trivial since the patches were trivial.
But fact is they aren't trivial - as you can e.g. see on Ingos patch that started this thread, and that was for the completely wrong place.
> - although a *proper* fix of one of > these bugs requires human-intelligence to figure out what's *really* intended, > the kconfig program *does* have enough information available to issue a a clear > warning: > > "Yo doodz - I don't know *what* you intended here, but this SELECT is just > waiting to sink its teeth into somebody's posterior. You might want to fix it > somehow before somebody needs rabies shots..." >...
And what do you want to do in such a case?
Kconfig is a user interface, and we actually need such cases you want to warn for for getting a good UI.
We already know what can cause problems.
But as far as I know there are no such problems users actually ran into in recent stable kernels - and most of the problems (like the one in this thread) are pathological cornercases you only see with randconfig.
cu Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
| |