[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiTEVwmj-PH98reZTibx+C_GLwAmXO0RFmJa9weZcg70g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2020 10:45:15 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL 1/2] Kbuild updates for v5.6-rc1
On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 8:06 PM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> - simplify built-in initramfs creation
Hmm.
This may simplify it from a _technical_ angle, but it seems to be a
fairly annoying step backwards from a UI perspective.
Now Kconfig asks a completely pointless question that most people have
absolutely zero interest in. The old situation was better, I feel.
Basically, I feel that from a "get normal users to test development
kernels", our Kconfig pain ends up being the biggest hurdle by far.
The kernel is easy to build and doesn't really require all that much
infrastructure, but generating the config - particularly when it
changes over time and you can't just say "just use the distro config"
- is a big step for people.
So honestly, while I've pulled this, I feel that this kind of change
is going _exactly_ the wrong way when it asks people questions that
they don't care one whit about.
If I as a kernel developer can't find it in myself to care and go "why
does it ask this new question", then that should tell you something.
Why do we have this choice in the first place? And no, it's not a
"simplification" to make life more complex for users.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists