Re: Why recovering from broken configs is too hard

• Next message: Eric S. Raymond: "Re: Why recovering from broken configs is too hard"
• Previous message: Geert Uytterhoeven: "Re: unsigned long ioremap()?"
• In reply to: Eric S. Raymond: "Why recovering from broken configs is too hard"
• Next in thread: Eric S. Raymond: "Re: Why recovering from broken configs is too hard"
• Reply: Eric S. Raymond: "Re: Why recovering from broken configs is too hard"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

"Eric S. Raymond" wrote:
> OK, so you want CML2's "make oldconfig" to do something more graceful than
> simply say "Foo! You violated this constraint! Go fix it!"
[...]
> Have I got the point across yet? There are *no* good solutions
> to this problem. There aren't even any clean ways to separate
> easy cases from hard ones.

No good solutions? Then how come I use "make oldconfig" every day...

Are we to assume from your long missive that you are turning the
possible into the impossible? :)

IMHO "make oldconfig" must stay.

-- 
Jeff Garzik      | Game called on account of naked chick
Building 1024    |
MandrakeSoft     |
-
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/

• Next message: Eric S. Raymond: "Re: Why recovering from broken configs is too hard"
• Previous message: Geert Uytterhoeven: "Re: unsigned long ioremap()?"
• In reply to: Eric S. Raymond: "Why recovering from broken configs is too hard"
• Next in thread: Eric S. Raymond: "Re: Why recovering from broken configs is too hard"
• Reply: Eric S. Raymond: "Re: Why recovering from broken configs is too hard"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon May 07 2001 - 21:00:15 EST