Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751258AbVIRA6f (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Sep 2005 20:58:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751262AbVIRA6f (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Sep 2005 20:58:35 -0400 Received: from zproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.162.204]:41498 "EHLO zproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751258AbVIRA6e convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Sep 2005 20:58:34 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=BtqHvkQDp5VS5qMS0Z7HXVqGfV01BADegfZp79Dt2uRVqRLQ+poiY9QK4oINg2OwJoyT9CJIR/qfDM5Qr4M3FG853dnZeiXSlu6eqn0kHqJGEb8buqq+ADvf7YOLBipcZayhfwo0tahInIyX8C/WifR6W6Rw2ninL3cJORP2+pg= Message-ID: <9a87484905091717587e35b9e7@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2005 02:58:31 +0200 From: Jesper Juhl Reply-To: jesper.juhl@gmail.com To: "Randy.Dunlap" Subject: Re: Why don't we separate menuconfig from the kernel? Cc: khc@pm.waw.pl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20050917175624.6637140d.rdunlap@xenotime.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <9a874849050917174635768d04@mail.gmail.com> <20050917175624.6637140d.rdunlap@xenotime.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2026 Lines: 44 On 9/18/05, Randy.Dunlap wrote: > On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 02:46:35 +0200 Jesper Juhl wrote: > > > On 17 Sep 2005 19:16:33 +0200, Krzysztof Halasa wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > A number of packages (e.g., busybox) use some, more or less broken, > > > version of menuconfig. Would it make sense to move menuconfig to > > > a separate well-defined package? > > > > > > > What exactely is it you want to make a sepperate package? > > > > menuconfig is just a little bit of the kbuild system which also > > includes xconfig, config, gconfig, oldconfig, etc. menuconfig is just > > a dialog based frontend to the kbuild system which consists of > > configuration options, help texts, dependency info etc. > > > > menuconfig uses `dialog` to present its menus and dialog boxes (using > > ncurses), and if you want to build something else using dialog, then > > that already exists as a sepperate program that has nothing to do with > > kbuild. On my system (Slackware) it's installed as /bin/dialog and > > comes from the pkgtools-10.2.0-i486-5 package. > > > > I don't think it makes much sense to split the parts of kbuild that > > make up menuconfig out into a standalone thing. kbuild (and thus > > menuconfig) has little use outside the kernel. The `dialog` tool is a > > different matter, but that is already a sepperately developed thing ( > > http://hightek.org/dialog/ ) . > > OTOH, Christoph Hellwig used to maintain 'mconf' out-of-tree > and it worked decently, so it seems not a big deal to so do. > I still fail to see the point of doing so, even if doable. -- Jesper Juhl Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html - 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/