From: Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Will 2.6 require Python for any configuration ? (CML2)
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 11:51:52 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <18892.998617912@kao2.melbourne.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 23 Aug 2001 22:52:35 GMT." <3b8788c0.11437523@mail.mbay.net>
On Thu, 23 Aug 2001 22:52:35 GMT,
jalvo@mbay.net (John Alvord) wrote:
>ESR is awaiting the 2.5 branch and the makefile rewrite.
Wrong. CML2 is working fine now. CML2 runs on kernel 2.4, with or
without kbuild 2.5. kbuild 2.5 supports CML1 and CML2 and runs on
kernel 2.4. There are no timeline dependencies between kbuild 2.5 and
CML2, they are independent features.
As the kbuild maintainer, I have no opinion about CML2, Python etc. I
do require several things from CML:
* Generate an accurate .config. CML1 can and does generate
inconsistent .config files, because the language assumes top down
processing. Menus break that assumption, CML2 fixes the problem,
Alan Cox's changes to CML1 may also do so.
* Use a single parser. CML1 uses three different parsers for
oldconfig, menuconfig and xconfig, each parser has special cases
which do not work on the other parsers. CML2 uses a single parser.
* Easy to maintain and verify. Everybody involved with CML1, including
the current maintainer, agrees that CML1 has reached end of life. It
is too difficult to maintain and to verify that the rule sets give
the desired results. CML2's constraint handler fixes this, AC's CML1
might, I have not looked at it.
* Easier to configure for beginners and to autoconfigure. The list of
configure options has grown to the point where it discourages people
from configuring their own kernel. WIth CML1 it is well nigh
impossible to autoconfigure a kernel by looking at the hardware and
deducing the config settings required.
As long as those requirements are met I do not care how .config is
created nor which language is used to build .config, display menus etc.
So far CML2 is the only code that meets the requirements. That does
not mean that CML2 is the only possibility, nor that Python 2.0 is an
absolute requirement. There is (or was) a work in progress to do CML2
in C instead of Python. If somebody else comes up with CML3, the
kbuild group would look at it.
Saying that Python is a problem is just guessing at this stage. CML2
will only be getting widespread usage in kernel 2.5, developers can
cope with installing the latest Python. By the time 2.6 is released,
Python 2.0 will be widespread.
Until somebody actually codes a better CML, we are going with CML2. If
you don't like CML2 or Python, do a better version instead of
complaining. Put up or shut up.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-08-24 1:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-08-22 6:08 Will 2.6 require Python for any configuration ? (CML2) =?unknown-8bit?B?RnLpZOlyaWMgTC4gVy4=?= Meunier
2001-08-23 12:05 ` Roland Bauerschmidt
2001-08-23 15:36 ` Bob Glamm
2001-08-23 15:55 ` Disconnect
2001-08-23 18:36 ` Daniel Phillips
2001-08-23 18:44 ` Disconnect
2001-08-23 19:01 ` David Weinehall
2001-08-23 19:22 ` Alan Cox
2001-08-23 19:02 ` Roland Bauerschmidt
2001-08-23 19:09 ` Rik van Riel
2001-08-23 19:31 ` Disconnect
2001-08-23 22:52 ` John Alvord
2001-08-24 1:51 ` Keith Owens [this message]
2001-08-23 15:55 ` Joshua Schmidlkofer
2001-08-23 15:59 ` Tom Rini
2001-08-23 19:26 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-08-23 19:32 ` David Weinehall
2001-08-23 19:41 ` Tom Rini
2001-08-23 19:50 ` Tom Rini
2001-08-23 20:02 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-08-23 20:13 ` Tom Rini
2001-08-23 20:43 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-08-23 21:12 ` Tom Rini
2001-08-24 4:59 ` Denis Perchine
2001-08-24 6:35 ` Leonid Mamtchenkov
2001-08-24 7:13 ` Denis Perchine
2001-08-24 15:01 ` Mark Hahn
2001-08-24 13:35 ` Ryan W. Maple
2001-08-25 1:14 ` Michael Peddemors
2001-08-24 17:42 ` David Lang
2001-08-23 16:24 ` Roland Bauerschmidt
2001-08-23 17:57 ` Kurt Roeckx
2001-08-24 8:10 ` Matthias Andree
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-08-23 20:41 Samium Gromoff
2001-08-23 20:53 ` Tom Rini
2001-08-25 4:11 ` Ben Ford
2001-08-25 14:51 ` Tom Rini
2001-08-23 20:56 Samium Gromoff
2001-08-23 21:14 ` Tom Rini
2001-08-23 21:08 Rick Hohensee
2001-08-23 21:01 ` Tom Rini
2001-08-23 21:12 Samium Gromoff
2001-08-23 21:32 ` Tom Rini
2001-08-23 21:18 Samium Gromoff
2001-08-23 21:34 ` Tom Rini
2001-08-24 12:59 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-08-24 15:37 ` Tom Rini
2001-08-24 15:42 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-08-24 15:50 ` Tom Rini
2001-08-24 16:03 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-08-23 21:39 Samium Gromoff
[not found] <20010823191423.I14302@cpe-24-221-152-185.az.sprintbbd.net>
2001-08-24 3:01 ` Rick Hohensee
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=18892.998617912@kao2.melbourne.sgi.com \
--to=kaos@ocs.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox