linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 1/4] CONFIG

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 31 May 2007 10:54:36 +0200
From:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To:	clameter@....com
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/4] CONFIG_STABLE: Define it

> --- slub.orig/init/Kconfig	2007-05-30 16:35:05.000000000 -0700
> +++ slub/init/Kconfig	2007-05-30 16:35:45.000000000 -0700
> @@ -65,6 +65,13 @@ endmenu
>  
>  menu "General setup"
>  
> +config STABLE
> +	bool "Stable kernel"
> +	help
> +	  If the kernel is configured to be a stable kernel then various
> +	  checks that are only of interest to kernel development will be
> +	  omitted.
> +
>  config LOCALVERSION
>  	string "Local version - append to kernel release"
>  	help

a) Why in Kconfig, why not in Makefile?

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.

c) A drawback of this general option is, it's hard to tell what will be
omitted in particular.
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-=== -=-= =====
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/