[lkml]   [2003]   [Jan]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: why the new config process is a *big* step backwards
> []
> (apologies to those who are thoroughly sick of this topic, but
> i'm now firmly convinced that i don't much care for the new
> config process, and i'm curious as to whether it's just me.
> Answer: probably.)


please study scripts/kconfig/*, not how one particular frontend is.
The new kernel configurator is actually a big improvement over the
traditional stuff we used to have up to 2.4. Okay, it is a fact that
xconfig is far from great, but that doesn't matter -- the important
thing is Kconfig provides a clean, generic system for the actual kernel
configuration. As I already pointed out a fortnight ago or so, the
only config frontend likely to stay in linux.tar in the long run is
menuconfig, serving as a reference to userland people who are certain
to come up with heaps of different Kconfig frontends (that is when
2.6 ships I guess).

If you need a nifty graphical frontend right away, I suggest you
go ahead and write the first off-tree xconfig.

Tomas Szepe <>
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 13:32    [W:0.066 / U:25.684 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site