Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753112Ab0FCUKe (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jun 2010 16:10:34 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:33493 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750924Ab0FCUKc (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jun 2010 16:10:32 -0400 Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 13:05:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Daniel Walker cc: Russell King , Kevin Hilman , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: ARM defconfig files In-Reply-To: <1275593742.23384.48.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> Message-ID: References: <20100603074548.GA12104@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100603181010.GA25779@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100603185333.GD25779@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <1275593742.23384.48.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2105 Lines: 48 On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, Daniel Walker wrote: > > If you did this for drivers, what about disabling a driver? If we used > "select" wouldn't that force all the drivers on without allowing it to > be unselected? Isn't that the point? If you have a specific platform, you don't want to pick them, you want to get the particular config file for it as a starting point. That's the _only_ reason to have those insane 177 defconfig files - because you want a _particular_ one. Once you have a particular one, you can always edit it with the regular configuration tools - including making tweaks by hand - as much as you want. So the only point of the thing would always be to get a result config file, one that you can then edit to your hearts content. And get it from a human-readable and writable description file, so that it would make sense to check it in to the kernel repository. Because right now, the current defconfig files DO NOT MAKE SENSE in the kernel repository. They are useless crud, and they hurt. So what I do _not_ want is the current crazy "give people these totally unreadable and unwritable raw config files". I want that extra step in between: something that allows you to _generate_ those idiotic files, but generate them from a reasonable human-editable template. And a Kconfig.xyz file _could_ be such a template. But anyway, I'm not actually all that excited about playing games with Kconfig files either. And I simply don't care. To me, a "git rm *defconfig" is perfectly acceptable. If you want to keep the current defconfig files, you can keep them on some random ARM site ("Here's a defconfig file for Nexus One"). So I'm actually perfectly fine with "no defconfig files at all, not even a template that can generate them". You can get the files from somewhere else where they don't hurt the kernel. Linus -- 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/