linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] kconfig: use long options in conf

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]

Message-ID: <20100729195052.GB20261@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:50:52 -0400
From:	Aristeu Rozanski <aris@...hat.com>
To:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
Cc:	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-kbuild <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Uwe Kleine-Koig <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] kconfig: use long options in conf

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 09:34:55PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> If you have a simple command that give you a list of new
> symbols then this is easy to script as Michal also
> shows with the below example.
> 
> > > How about
> > > new=$(make listnewconfig)
> > > if test -n "$new"; then
> > >     echo "Please set the following options:" >&2
> > >     echo "$new" >&2
> > >     exit 1
> > > fi
> > > ? Wouldn't that be the same as nonint_oldconfig before?
> > what's the other use cases for listnewconfig (other than a incomplete
> > nonint_oldconfig)?
> 
> listnewconfig is for everyone that like to see a list of new
> config options - without touching the current configuration.
> 
> By limiting listnewconfig to do only one thing you actually
> create further uses than before.
> 
> This is not about how well it applies to the tailored
> use in redhat's current scripts.
*sigh* I think we have people able to handle such complex changes.

this is not what it's about. I don't care how it's called or if scripts
will need to be changed. What I want to know is if either:
a) we're reducing functionality of something in order to support more *real*
   use cases with the same code, making it more generic;
or
b) we're reducing functionality based in theorical use cases.

if it's (a), you get my ACK

-- 
Aristeu

--
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/