Messages in this thread |  | | From | (Matthias Urlichs) | Subject | Re: A little pre-2.0 input | Date | 25 May 1996 18:37:58 +0200 |
| |
In linux.dev.kernel, article <19960514022004.7211.qmail@Mail.UTexas.EDU>, lilo <TaRDiS@mail.utexas.edu> writes: > > > 1) Configuration still seems a tiny bit illogical. For example, > > it asks certain things (like CONFIG_ETHERNET) in weird places. > > Also, maybe the (NEW) thing shouldn't appear when .config doesn't > > already exist? > > NO!!!! Many of us copy our .config from the previous kernel tree into > arch/<whatever/defconfig of the new kernel tree, as a last step before > running `make mrproper' and compiling the new kernel.
The two-tiered defconfig / .config scheme was specifically implemented so that your local patches don't make the kernel you just configured unpatchable.
> Don't assume that just because there is no .config, there is no old > configuration.
On the contrary. The reasonable way to supply old config to a new kernel is to copy .config from old to new, and then run "make oldconfig". I don't know why you would want to replace defconfig.
I also don't know why you would want to run "make mrproper" before compiling a new kernel. "make clean" should be sufficient. (In theory, "touch config.h" should be sufficient.) If not, that's a bug in the Makefiles.
It's too bad, by the way, that "make -t" doesn't work right -- too many targets are not marked as phony.
-- "So, do you live around here often?" -- Steve Wright -- Matthias Urlichs
|  |