From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2011 23:46:18 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 04/28] linux: use the defconfig mechanism after tuning the config In-Reply-To: <505d71eb153b750e7af08640a90e2efec8cbcf39.1309895466.git.thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> (Thomas Petazzoni's message of "Tue, 5 Jul 2011 21:53:55 +0200") References: <505d71eb153b750e7af08640a90e2efec8cbcf39.1309895466.git.thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <87pqllpxw5.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Petazzoni writes: Thomas> Currently, the kernel configuration mechanism works as follows for Thomas> custom configuration files: Thomas> * Copy the custom config file to buildroot_defconfig in the kernel Thomas> tree Thomas> * Run "make buildroot_defconfig" Thomas> * Remove the buildroot_defconfig Thomas> * Tune the .config depending on some Buildroot options (EABI, MDEV, Thomas> etc.) Thomas> * Run oldconfig Thomas> And for a defconfig-based configuration: Thomas> * Run "make XXX_defconfig" Thomas> * Tune the .config depending on some Buildroot options (EABI, MDEV, Thomas> etc.) Thomas> * Run oldconfig Thomas> The problem is that the tuning done on the .config file can lead to Thomas> have new options available for which no value has been set. Therefore, Thomas> the "oldconfig" at the end of the process will hang the build process, Thomas> waiting for the user to confirm what should be done. Why don't we just call 'make silentoldconfig' instead? -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard