[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110530114214.GC22324@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 13:42:14 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix corruption of CONFIG_X86_32 in 'make oldconfig'
* David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 13:04 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > That v2 changelog still seems to have an attitude though about the
> > ARCH=i386 and ARCH=x86_64 modifiers (thoroughly debunked both by
> > myself and others), so mind sending a v3 one which correctly and
> > fairly describes the situation? (or ack my variant which ought to be
> > pretty close)
>
> SIGWENCH; have to run. Back later. Can we make it something like
>
> "This version preserves the legacy ARCH=i386/ARCH=x86_64 behaviour for
> randconfig/oldconfig/all*config, although I believe that this *ought* to
> be removed in the future, in favour of a generic method of overriding
> config options — one that doesn't work *only* for one particular config
> setting (CONFIG_64BIT), and *only* on one architecture (there's no
> equivalent for mips/powerpc/s390/parisc/sparc to flip CONFIG_64BIT for
> you)."
>
> It's less of an 'attitude' but I think it clearly states the situation?
Not sure we can actually remove it all that soon - people rely on it
and seem to like it, me included!
What kind of replacement are you suggesting?
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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