Re: [BK PATCHES] kbuild/kconfig

[Sam Ravnborg]

On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 08:34:25PM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> 
> I'd much rather we keep our current scheme because it makes 100% sense
> for ARM since there is no "generic" configuration which covers a subset
> of configurations.

What has changed is only the steps needed.
Old way:
make anakin_config	=> copied def-configs/ankin to .config
make oldconfig		=> required to make a consistent config

New way
make anakin_defconfig	=> Creates a consistent config in one step

The patch just introduced a generic method to fetch a given
configuration and to make that configuration consistent.
Similar to running "make oldconfig".

See, no new funtionality, just a different way to achieve the same.
OK?

> To illustrate this fact, here's some statistics on the symbolic usage
> between all the default configurations on ARM:
> 
> - 414 configuration symbols are only defined on one default configuration
>   file.
> - 281 configuration symbols occur in between 2 and 9 inclusive files.
> - 122 configuration symbols occur between 10 and 46 files.
> - 3 configuration symbols occur in all 47 default configuration files.
> 
> I'm far from happy doing any conversions to make this work.  The current
> system was fine and fit our needs exactly.

As outlined in a private mail, the only thing needed for arm to do
is to rename 48 files and one directory. And to delete ~10 lines form a
makefile.
That is an acceptable price to pay for getting generic support for something
that will see wider use by other architectures (my prediction).

	Sam
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/