[lkml]   [2001]   [Aug]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Will 2.6 require Python for any configuration ? (CML2)
> Maybe it's just me, but adding a dependency solely for the sake of
> building the kernel doesn't strike me as very clean or elegant.

IMHO that is a highly suspect view. Kernel building is already a hideously
complicated problem [At least it seems so to me]. I am certainly in favor
using a more intelligent and capable scripting lang to add capability and
reduce some of the dependancy & symbol issues. If all we are doing is adding
a different front end, it's not of much point, but some genuises here have
streched make + shell to about as far as one can. So if that can be done
with make, someone surley can replace all that with Python. [However, maybe
I have missed the scope of the inclusion of python]
Also, I would like to point out that while Python does have a 'flavor of
the month' look for some people, it is a useable stable solution. Who
knows what my supercede it tomorrow, but as a whole it's maturing, and I
personally use it a TON. Plus it has a powerful library.

Side note:
It took about 10 days for the last kernel compile I did on my 386sx 16
[whopping 32 megs of ram thought =] [that was a while ago].. I suspect that
with python it wouldn't actually take much longer. Besides, I compile
kernels for it on something else.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:58    [W:0.107 / U:1.208 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site