Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 31 May 2007 02:03:24 -0700 (PDT) | Subject | Re: [RFC 1/4] CONFIG_STABLE: Define it | From | David Miller <> |
| |
From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 10:54:36 +0200
> b) Of course nobody wants STABLE=n. :-) How about: > > config RELEASE > bool "Build for release" > help > If the kernel is declared as a release build here, then > various checks that are only of interest to kernel development > will be omitted.
Agreed :-)
> > c) A drawback of this general option is, it's hard to tell what will be > omitted in particular.
In that sense it is similar to EMBEDDED, but I still think there is high value to this, I can already think of several things I want to put under this which are only noise I want to see during development periods. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |