[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=X2PzoqJy_dY0oBA9=y_hGt-fX4g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 10:53:05 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix corruption of CONFIG_X86_32 in 'make oldconfig'
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 12:25, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>> > I personally prefer 'make ARCH=i386 defconfig' and 'make ARCH=x86_64
>> > defconfig' because it's a nice conceptual equivalent to:
>> >
>> > make ARCH=arm defconfig
>> > make ARCH=mips defconfig
>>
>> No, ARCH= is just for cross-compiling. If you're *on* an ARM or MIPS
>> box, you don't need the ARCH= bit.
>
> Still note that 'make ARCH=arm defconfig' will just work fine even
> without cross-building, so i often use just that if i want to see
> what default core kernel options ARM (or MIPS) has enabled these
> days.
That's still the first part of "cross-building", so the issue is moot.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
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