J.A. Magallon wrote:
> On 2003.01.31 Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
>>On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 01:41:26PM -0600, Kai Germaschewski wrote:
>>
>>>Generally, we've been trying to not make perl a prequisite for the kernel
>>>build, and I'd like to keep it that way. Except for some arch specific
>>
>>That's pretty much out the window when klibc gets merged, so perl will
>>indeed be a build requirement for all platforms...
>>
>
>
> So in short, kernel people:
> - do not want perl in the kernel build
> - allow qt to pollute the kernel to have a decent gui config tool
> - have to rewrite half perl features in C
> - but perl will be needed anyways
>
> instead of
> - do all parsing in perl, that is what perl is for and what is mainly done
> in kconfig scripts
> - do the config backend in perl, and...
> - do the gui in perl-XXX, so you can have perl-GTK, perl-GTK2, perl-QT or
> perl-Tk, even perl-Xaw (so you get rid of tcl/tk)
>
> I really do not understand...
Well, you appear to be taking the superset of opinions, which is
guaranteed to generate a paradox, I should think ;-)
Specifically regarding kconf, it does not require Qt; Qt is merely an
optional piece.
For Perl, yes I personally think it is needed anyway. And re-creating
Perl's features in C, just to avoid Perl, is not the best technical
solution when developers already have Perl installed.
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 31 2003 - 22:00:26 EST