linux-kernel - Re: How to remove 2000+ lines from 400+ defconfig files?

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: <1321371462.20271.201.camel@x61.thuisdomein>
Date:	Tue, 15 Nov 2011 16:37:42 +0100
From:	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
To:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
Cc:	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: How to remove 2000+ lines from 400+ defconfig files?

On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 14:14 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> I am fine taking those through trivial.git and handling the fallout.

Great.

> The only ones I'd have objections to taking immediately are those which are 
> actually still referenced somewhere in the code.
> For those, either taking them through appropriate maintainers, or having 
> their Acked-by would be required.

I don't mind. That shouldn't be a lot of extra work for me. 

But, I do have a naive question: are defconfigs meant to be drop in
replacements for .config files or is one supposed to first feed them to
the config tools to generate an up to date .config? Since, if one is
supposed to feed them to the config tools first it doesn't matter
whether the (outdated) macros are still used somewhere in the code,
doesn't it? The config tools will simply drop all macros they can't
match with Kconfig symbols. (Or don't they? Michal?)

Paul Bolle

--
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/