Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751315AbVIRH33 (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Sep 2005 03:29:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751316AbVIRH33 (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Sep 2005 03:29:29 -0400 Received: from pfepb.post.tele.dk ([195.41.46.236]:2928 "EHLO pfepb.post.tele.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751315AbVIRH32 (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Sep 2005 03:29:28 -0400 Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2005 09:30:16 +0200 From: Sam Ravnborg To: Martin Fouts Cc: jesper.juhl@gmail.com, Krzysztof Halasa , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Why don't we separate menuconfig from the kernel? Message-ID: <20050918073016.GB11257@mars.ravnborg.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1999 Lines: 46 On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 06:53:55PM -0700, Martin Fouts wrote: > I don't have a patch yet, but I've just spent a bit of time looking at > how kbuild works, and I believe there is a fairly straightforward way to > keep kbuild in the kernel tree but make it easy to split it out so that > someone could use it as a separate tool. > > If this idea, appropriately modified, makes sense, I'll spend a bit of > time to do a patch and set it up. > > The basic idea is that kbuild stays in the kernel source tree, but a > simple script is used to grab a copy of it out of the tree. That copy > is maintained as a separate "build/configuration" package, and the > maintainer (yes, I'm volunteering) would keep the two versions in (near) > sync. > > After a quick glance, it looks like one would want to copy > > Documentation/kbuild/* > Scripts/kconfig/* > Makefile > > To this new copy. The only real work to get started, it appears, and > the reason why I'd rather have a discussion before I start, would be to > split the toplevel Makefile up a bit, so that the 'pure kbuild' bits > were moved into an include file. It's really that include file, not the > toplevel Makefile that would need to be copied. > > I suggest doing this because most of the make-related knowledge about > kbuild itself is in that Makefile, but non-kernel users would not want > the kernel specific targets. > > I know of two other packages (busybox and ptxdist) that use kconfig now, > and have been contemplating it for some of my projects, as well, so I'm > interested enough to take the project on. I'm a bit confused. Do you want to take a copy of kbuild or kconfig? kbuild is much more intiminate than kconfig althougth the latter has a few kernel only issues too. Sam - 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/