David> On 28 Sep 1999, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> Now the questions is really why nobody fixes menuconfig
>> instead. It seems that for every little irrelevant change either
>> menuconfig or xconfig breaks for whatever stupid thing. If the
>> situation is not improved we really should remove them from the
>> kernel tree, they seem to cause more grief than good.
David> The principle shit in - shit out quite reasonably applies to
David> both, eventhough there are quite a lot of nasty bugs in xconfig
David> (or at least missing features)...
David> It's better to fix the Config.in files than to blame
David> menuconfig/xconfig each time... After all, we don't blame make
David> if there are errors in the Makefile's.
So we hack Config.in because menuconfig is broken, that really sounds
like a stupid solution to me.
Having the following in Config.in is _not broken:
if [ "$ARCH" = "ppc"]
bool "foo" CONFIG_SOME_RANDOM_THING
fi
if [ "$ARCH" = "mips"]
bool "bar" CONFIG_SOME_RANDOM_THING
fi
Is _not_ broken as long as the condition cannot invoke the question
twice. This is just one example of brokenness in the menu based config
programs.
Jes
-
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/