On Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:31:26 -0400, Disconnect <lkml@sigkill.net>
wrote:
>On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Rik van Riel did have cause to say:
>
>> On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Disconnect wrote:
>>
>> > ONLY task that they will use python for. And everyone who builds a kernel
>> > will have gcc, so thats the 'ideal' dependency. Second and third most
>> > likely, a C++ compiler or perl (depending on what you figure the
>> > installbase of each one is). Forth, some form of java runtime. And after
>> > that is python.
>>
>> Sounds like you'd just might be fanatical enough to implement
>> CML2 in C or Perl, then ;)
>>
>> Personally, I'd welcome such a thing...
>
>You are mistaking my position I think. Personally, I like python quite a
>bit ;)
>
>But my point isn't that its good/bad for CML2. My point is that I would
>be very surprised if you had to install python in order to configure and
>build a kernel under CML2, once CML2 is the official configuration
>platform. (Right now it is necessary to have python to use cml2. But
>CML2 is not yet in the stock kernel sources.)
>
>But until ESR either chimes in or releases the final CML2, this is a moot
>discussion.
ESR is awaiting the 2.5 branch and the makefile rewrite.
My impression is that CML2 is "less bad" than CML in terms of weird
languages and buggy interpreters.
john
-
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 : Thu Aug 23 2001 - 21:01:03 EST