lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1996]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: source dependencies cleanup? (fwd)
    Date
    From

    > Oh, one other things, while I'm thinking of it. I know this was brought up
    > quite some time ago (I think it was as far back as 1.1.x) but I don't
    > remember the outcome.
    >
    > The question is: is there any GOOD reason why the Configure program is
    > still written as a bash script? I'm a big fan of Perl myself, and I'd say
    > it's reasonable to expect anyone who is configuring and compiling their
    > own kernel to have Perl installed. Obviously we wouldn't want to depend on
    > my particular Perl _libraries_ being installed, just the bare necessities.
    >
    > The reason I ask is that if/when I do start rewriting Configure to
    > seperate dependancy information, Perl would make the program much easier
    > to write.

    Perl is not available on all systems, but bash is (I think it is a
    requirement for compiling the kernel, isn't it?).

    As for alternative configuration programs, those already exist too
    for curses and X, though I think they could be improved (simplified).

    What would be a _GREAT_ idea, is to write a configuration program
    for all the niggling little bits, like changing NR_* easily, so that below
    average chimp intelligence is required :-)

    --
    Andrew E. Mileski mailto:aem@ott.hookup.net
    Linux Plug-and-Play Kernel Project http://www.redhat.com/linux-info/pnp/
    XFree86 Matrox Team http://www.bf.rmit.edu.au/~ajv/xf86-matrox.html

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:38    [W:0.019 / U:148.444 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site