Hi Peter.
>>> You have seen xconfig, right?
>> You are presumably aware that xconfig has been unmaintained
>> for several years now...
> No. I wasn't.
As you've probably seen, Alan Cox corrected me on that: Whilst
xconfig has no official maintainer, it gets tweaked by the config
and menuconfig maintainers, plus lots of other people, as and
when they see fit to fix something in it.
> Of make oldconfig, config, menuconfig, xconfig, it was the
> only one that would wite a .config on 2.3.44 at least,
> straight "out of the box".
I have to admit that surprises me, and suggests that there was a
bug in the config.in scripts somewhere. Of the three, xconfig is
inherently more forgiving of bugs than config or menuconfig.
> The rest wouldn't write a EXT2_FS entry, possibly because
> of a broken other fs section somewhere close above.
Most probably.
> I thought you were all using xconfig.
Hardly - most of the boxes I set up don't even get X installed on
them. Personally, I prefer menuconfig, and from the comments I've
seen over the years, most people agree with me.
> (still seeking time in the never ending game of work to
> hunt down those 30 pin simms).
If you can find them, they'll be very much appreciated.
Best wishes from Riley.
* Copyright (C) 2000, Memory Alpha Systems.
* All rights and wrongs reserved.
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| There is something frustrating about the quality and speed of Linux |
| development, ie., the quality is too high and the speed is too high, |
| in other words, I can implement this XXXX feature, but I bet someone |
| else has already done so and is just about to release their patch. |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
* http://www.memalpha.cx/Linux/Kernel/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 15 2000 - 21:00:16 EST