[lkml]   [2010]   [Jul]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH] kconfig: use long options in conf
    On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 09:34:55PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
    > If you have a simple command that give you a list of new
    > symbols then this is easy to script as Michal also
    > shows with the below example.
    > > > How about
    > > > new=$(make listnewconfig)
    > > > if test -n "$new"; then
    > > > echo "Please set the following options:" >&2
    > > > echo "$new" >&2
    > > > exit 1
    > > > fi
    > > > ? Wouldn't that be the same as nonint_oldconfig before?
    > > what's the other use cases for listnewconfig (other than a incomplete
    > > nonint_oldconfig)?
    > listnewconfig is for everyone that like to see a list of new
    > config options - without touching the current configuration.
    > By limiting listnewconfig to do only one thing you actually
    > create further uses than before.
    > This is not about how well it applies to the tailored
    > use in redhat's current scripts.
    *sigh* I think we have people able to handle such complex changes.

    this is not what it's about. I don't care how it's called or if scripts
    will need to be changed. What I want to know is if either:
    a) we're reducing functionality of something in order to support more *real*
    use cases with the same code, making it more generic;
    b) we're reducing functionality based in theorical use cases.

    if it's (a), you get my ACK


     \ /
      Last update: 2010-07-29 21:51    [W:0.022 / U:3.220 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site