Hi,
At http://www.xs4all.nl/~zippel/lc/lkc-0.5.tar.gz you can find the
latest version of the new config system. Besides various small bug
fixes, it includes the following changes:
- Improved mouse interface of qconf
- qconf isn't build if QT isn't available
- "if" ... "endif" block added
- update to 2.5.35
With the exception of the X interface I'm not planning any big visible
changes anymore, so slowly I'd like to know any reason, why this config
system shouldn't go into 2.5.x. The old arguments against cml2 don't
really work anymore, so you have to come up with something new. :-)
The only argument I know of is that various people on kbuild mailing
list are afraid, that Linus wouldn't accept such a big change. I think
hardly anyone cares how the config backend is implemented, so the only
really visible change is the new config format, but here only the format
is new, the information is still the same (if anyone cares about the
subtle differences, I can explain them separately). Making a clear cut
now is really the easiest solution. Changing parsers and syntax
separately would be more painful, as we risks constants subtle behaviour
changes and bugs during this period, by doing a single switch we can
quickly get over it.
Otherwise the little feedback I got was mostly positive, so if anything
thinks the old config system is in any way better, I'd really like to
know about it now (and if anyone wants to keep the old system, (s)he
just volunteered to fix all the subtle differences between the three
different parsers). So unless I hear objections rather soon, it's up to
Linus.
bye, Roman
Roman Zippel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> At http://www.xs4all.nl/~zippel/lc/lkc-0.5.tar.gz you can find the
> latest version of the new config system. Besides various small bug
> fixes, it includes the following changes:
> - Improved mouse interface of qconf
> - qconf isn't build if QT isn't available
> - "if" ... "endif" block added
> - update to 2.5.35
>
> With the exception of the X interface I'm not planning any big visible
> changes anymore, so slowly I'd like to know any reason, why this config
> system shouldn't go into 2.5.x.
[...]
> Otherwise the little feedback I got was mostly positive, so if anything
> thinks the old config system is in any way better, I'd really like to
> know about it now (and if anyone wants to keep the old system, (s)he
> just volunteered to fix all the subtle differences between the three
> different parsers). So unless I hear objections rather soon, it's up to
> Linus.
How about posting a kernel patch (or link to one) that you feel is
suitable for 2.5.x integration? That makes it a bit easier to review in
context, and may help to resolve any final integration issues.
For the record I like what I've seen so far...
Jeff
Hi
On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> How about posting a kernel patch (or link to one) that you feel is
> suitable for 2.5.x integration? That makes it a bit easier to review in
> context, and may help to resolve any final integration issues.
That depends on what you want to see. The package itself is installed
under scripts/lkc ("make install" just makes a symlink) and is pretty much
the same you find in the archive (minus the converter). A problem here is
that the current kbuild can't deal with C++ files and builds too much
even if you just want a single target, so it's currently not using the
kbuild infrastructure.
The other big part are the converted config files, they are currently
generated as Config.new, so they can be easily removed again. A "final"
patch would be hardly readable. Installing (and uninstalling) the package
into a kernel tree is quite simple, so I prefer to do it this way to save
bandwidth.
> For the record I like what I've seen so far...
Thanks. :)
bye, Roman
Hi Roman.
Made it apply clean to 2.5.34 (not 2.5.35).
Played a little with make xconfig.
make xconfig
- Do some selections
- Use mouse to select save icon on tool-bar
- File|Quit
->Save Configuration? Press yes
End result is an empty .config file
If I select No in the Save Configuration dialog everything is fine.
Sam
Hi,
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> make xconfig
> - Do some selections
> - Use mouse to select save icon on tool-bar
> - File|Quit
> ->Save Configuration? Press yes
> End result is an empty .config file
I've seen it once too, but I couldn't remember how to reproduce it, but I
now know what happens. A second save goes wrong if nothing changed since
the last save. It's easy to fix, thanks for finding this.
bye, Roman