Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 16 Feb 2002 04:01:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 16 Feb 2002 04:01:37 -0500 Received: from duba05h05-0.dplanet.ch ([212.35.36.52]:29456 "EHLO duba05h05-0.dplanet.ch") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 16 Feb 2002 04:01:26 -0500 Message-ID: <3C6E1F90.40404@dplanet.ch> Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2002 10:00:00 +0100 From: "Giacomo A. Catenazzi" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i586; en-US; rv:0.9.5) Gecko/20011023 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: kbuild [which is not only CML2] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello I have some comment/explications about the thread about kbuild. 1- The discussion was also on lkml, ESR asked to kbuild people to give some comments, using also the feed-back of lkml. As you noticed, in lkml the discussion went into flames, fogetting the important points. [As this flame is going forgetting kbuild-2.5..]] 2- The comments in kbuild list are accessible to all. You should read them (hmm, really there are only one full comment [my comment] + discution/flame] 3- The importants points are: CML2 and kbuild-2.5 are two different projects, which don't depend each other. The need of the two project is also demostrated by the other never finished similar project (mconfig, kernconfig, mcml2, cml2config, dancing-makefiles, ...) 4- Nobody talked about kbuild-2.5. It really correct actual makefiles. And I hope that Linus correct this bahaviour in a time manner (and not as last big makefile correction in 2.4.0-testX). 5- What wrong with kbuild-2.5? Keith seems to comunicate better with other kernel developers, [The main point of kbuild-2.5 are: no more required make mrproper -> faster, no more 'touch include/*/*.h', multiple trees, read-oly sources,...] 6- Old configuration programs, IMHO, are not so broken, but there is a big problem of maintainability. Every 10 patches, few are incorrect. Few developers (maybe no developers) will use xconfig, and also few developers have read the Documentation/kbuild/. This inevitably port people to write Config.in as bash shell (WRONG!), forgetting that unset configuration have variable unset OR set to 'n'. These problems seems not so huge, but with actual kernel development there are. It is difficult to push corection patch into the main kernel. Who will help kbuild people? [CML2 will solve the problem at the source: same engine for all interface, with more checks, so original sender will have the correct config.in]. 7- Andrea'WAlan did you make some tools for CML1 and did you not publish? Why? (not published == not existance from the other people). 8- Read who wrote menuconfig, and you see why ESR want to replace it. 9- Read some user list about configuration problem and you see that CML1 cause user much problem that a kernel hacker see. (menuconfig didn't compile, where is such symbols?) No flame please. Tell us what is wrong in kbuild-2-5 and in CML2. Don't flame! If you flame about CML2, ESR will answer you and then he forget the initial proposal of improvement. giacomo, who don't understan why kbuild-2.5 is not in kernel - 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/