[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E42C575.1040408@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 12:52:53 -0500
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: emmanuel.deloget@...xo.com
CC: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@...il.com>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Enable 'make CONFIG_FOO=y oldconfig'
On 08/10/2011 12:00 PM, Emmanuel Deloget wrote:
>
> I understand that my question is indeed neither wanted nor clever, but
> what's the point of trying to support "make CONFIG_FOO=y"?
>
> Will we be expected to type a 42 meters long command line to compile the
> kernel instead of doing a menuconfig in the foreseable future? (and
> between typos, unmet dependencies and the myriad of other possible
> errors, I'm not sure I'll get more free time).
>
> I don't get it. If the goal is to help the kernel hackers and if it
> really helps them it might be a thing to do - it might prove useful for
> very simple CONFIG_ options but I'm not sure this will stay true for the
> general case.
>
That's useful for some cases, though, instead of having to create a
file; the driving cases here are architecture, platform or 32/64-bit
selection. For longer ones you'll create a file.
And no, menuconfig and .config files will not go away.
-hpa
--
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