Re: [PATCH] /proc/config.gz against 2.2.3

Oliver Xymoron (oxymoron@waste.org)
Sat, 13 Mar 1999 21:40:01 -0600 (CST)


[talking about my "patch names" hack included in previous patch]

On Sun, 14 Mar 1999, Alan Cox wrote:

> > The only objection I've gotten to this so far is from Ingo, who claimed it
> > would encourage forking. Any others?
>
> I don't think its a big issue. In terms of -ac certainly the ultimate aim
> is to have -ac contain nothing exciting enough to make anyone download it
> over the Linus tree

I don't think forking's much of an issue either. But being able to keep
track of which patches you're using (especially if someone gives you a
precompiled kernel) is useful. Together with the config.gz thing, this
will let you report most of the relevant info about a running kernel
(config options, compiler, applied patches) with a simple script.

And simply being able to build 2.2.x and 2.2.x+foo on the same machine
without having them overwrite each other's modules should be worth it by
itself for developers.

--
 "Love the dolphins," she advised him. "Write by W.A.S.T.E.." 

- 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/