[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070531.020324.35020300.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 02:03:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de
Cc: clameter@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/4] CONFIG_STABLE: Define it
From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.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@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists