[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:0.089 / U:6.572 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site