From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 20:57:46 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 06/16 v3] core: introduce a generated kconfig snippet In-Reply-To: <20160901175221.GA5841@free.fr> (Yann E. MORIN's message of "Thu, 1 Sep 2016 19:52:21 +0200") References: <20160827161601.2fd0e8f5@free-electrons.com> <87poosaa9d.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> <20160901175221.GA5841@free.fr> Message-ID: <87k2evwiqd.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >>>>> "Yann" == Yann E MORIN writes: Hi, >> Why do we _HAVE_ to continue to support it? > I was going to prepare a patchset to remove the list of packages from > the manual, when I stumbled on *one* reason parts of it is interesting > to have in the manual: the list of virtual packages, their symboles and > their providers. > I think this is worth having in the manual, if at least for packagers of > new packages that would need or provide such a virtual package. Perhaps. > However, I think the normal and deperacted packages should be removed, > and our script made much simpler (if at all possible). > So, what's the idea: > - remove all packages (easy) > - keep as-is (even easier) > - only keep virtual packages (not easy at all) Personally I would go for 1, but if 3 is doable without too much work / complexity (and you feel up for it), then that is also OK with me. -- Venlig hilsen, Peter Korsgaard