Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 03:27:46 +0200 (CEST)
From: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
To: Emmanuel Fleury <fleury@cs.aau.dk>
cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Automatic Configuration of a Kernel
In-Reply-To: <432962B1.6040302@cs.aau.dk>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0509170320000.3743@scrub.home>
References: <20050914223836.53814.qmail@web51011.mail.yahoo.com>
 <Pine.LNX.4.61.0509151253120.3743@scrub.home> <432962B1.6040302@cs.aau.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1140
Lines: 32

Hi,

On Thu, 15 Sep 2005, Emmanuel Fleury wrote:

> Why not directly having a direct reference to the name of the script ?
> 
> config FOO
> 	bool "foo"
> 	auto "detect-foo-script"
> 
> Where you have a specific directory in scripts/autoconfig/ where you
> store the scripts. Each script output y, n or m.

Unless there is an example, which really needs this, I don't think this is 
a good idea. Mainly because I don't like the idea of running random 
scripts during the config process, I prefer to keep this a little under 
control.

> This scheme seems much simpler to me (and yet not restrictive at all).
> Of course, each script might have to ask few questions to the user as:
> Do you want this FOO support ? [y/m/n]:

This will almost certainly not happen. The autoconfig rules would also be 
useful in the graphical config front ends and something like this would 
prevent it.

bye, Roman
-
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/