From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2013 00:07:28 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] Patchwork oldest patches cleanup #2 (deadline November 17) In-Reply-To: <5278143A.5070505@mind.be> References: <527746D2.5000802@mind.be> <5278143A.5070505@mind.be> Message-ID: <20131105000728.49c0d1a6@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Arnout Vandecappelle, On Mon, 04 Nov 2013 22:40:10 +0100, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: > I completely agree, that was the reason that I created the patch in > the first place. > > Unfortunately, the x86_defconfig is _huge_. And as mentioned by > ThomasP, the other architecture's defconfigs aren't worth much. So I > don't think this patch is really valuable after all. I agree. For anyone sane, x86_defconfig is basically unusable due to the enormous number of options that it enables. And for other architectures, a default defconfig doesn't make much sense, since there usually isn't any "sane" default. I very much prefer users to be asked loudly to provide a proper defconfig rather than having Buildroot pick the kernel default one, and then have users wonder why the kernel doesn't boot on their platform. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com