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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20071006204721.GF22435@flower.upol.cz> Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 22:47:21 +0200 From: Oleg Verych <olecom@...wer.upol.cz> To: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>, "Elyse M. Grasso" <emgrasso@...a-raptors.com>, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>, Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, kbuild-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, Andreas Herrmann <aherrman@...or.de> Subject: Re: A bit of kconfig rewrite (Re: [PATCH] 9p: fix compile error if !CONFIG_SYSCTL) On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 08:59:20PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > Maintenance and acceptance of the m4/make/perl/C/ncurses community of my > > mainly `TERM=linux ; sed && sh' approach is more important for me. > > There is noone having trouble with ncurses dependency today. Who wants to meet a zombie anyway? == Message-ID: <20051212004606.31263.37616.stgit@...hine.or.cz> == From: Petr Baudis Subject: [PATCH 3/3] [kconfig] Direct use of lxdialog routines by menuconfig Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 01:46:06 +0100 After three years, the zombie walks again! This patch (against the latest git tree) cleans up interaction between kconfig's mconf (menuconfig frontend) and lxdialog. Its commandline interface disappears in this patch, instead a .so is packed from the lxdialog objects and the relevant functions are called directly from mconf. == * == > And perl is not yet mandatory for a kernel build expect > for a few architectures. Not build per se, but perl mind share of the people. Did they ever looked into `strace`, when running (kind of) `perl simple-regex`? Maybe there weren't right people to manage things easily in shell? Reinventing parser was a major step back, whatever anyone can say. == (seems like not original ID) 17982.5167906985$1029355529@...s.gmane.org == From: Sam Ravnborg Subject: Get rid of shell based Config.in parsers? Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 22:14:00 +0200 [...] I dislike seeing arguments that this is not easy/possible in shell based parsers. If the chosen technology does not fit the problem domain then it's about time to shift technology. Sam == * == == Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0208151048330.3130-100000@...e.transmeta.com> == From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Get rid of shell based Config.in parsers? Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 10:51:03 -0700 (PDT) On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > Where comes the requirement that we shall keep the existing shell > based config parsers? I use them exclusively. It is far and away the most convenient parsing - just to do "make oldconfig" (possibly by making changes by hand to the .config file first). As far as I'm personally concerned, the shell parsers are the _only_ parser that really matter. So if you want to replace them with something else, that something else had better be pretty much perfect and not take all that long to build. Linus == * == > m4 is not used by the kernel - to my best knowledge. That was a rhetoric (i guess) statement. But it *is* used to configure/build almost all tools, currently directly or indirectly kbuild/kconfig uses. `m4 'make "shell"'` *OR* `To quote lguest 'To quote David Wheeler: "Any problem in computer science can be solved with another layer of indirection."'` That's my personal view. And after 5-6 years of the "development", i can see the "results". Again, will see. ____ - 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