[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55134c91-00c4-4a5b-a897-1c12d297671c@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2025 09:44:57 -0800
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, ojeda@...nel.org,
boqun.feng@...il.com
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree
On 11/24/25 6:53 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 03:48:12PM +0100, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 3:35 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> At some point in the past... I just did again, and updated the relevant
>>> packages and rustavailable is still green, but allmodconfig is still not
>>> giving me rust.
>>>
>>> I'm on Debian Testing.
>>
>> There are several `depends on` for `CONFIG_RUST` as Boqun mentions, so
>> it is likely one of those is blocking you.
>>
>> The easiest way to know which one it is is to check what `menuconfig`
>> computes about the requirements (searching with the `/` command).
>
> Yeah, that output is so long it scrolls out of the right side of the
> screen and it really isn't nice to read with all the negations.
>
I've always found xconfig better for seeing dependencies. Of course, that
also adds a few build requirements.
--
~Randy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists