From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de>
To: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@mindspring.com>
Cc: Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: test suite?
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 18:34:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030122173405.GF1733@fs.tum.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301220840530.2622-100000@dell>
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 08:44:05AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> i've noticed references to "test suites" for kernels, but
> is there any one-step convenient way to select every possible
> option for test-compiling a new kernel, just to see if it builds?
> perhaps an "everything" option?
>
> and, related to that, should such a kernel theoretically
> work? as in, are there any options that would be mutually
> exclusive that would cause such a build to fail?
It shouldn't be possible to select mutually exclusive options.
I'm using three .config's:
1. CONFIG_MODULES not set, everything else turned on
2. CONFIG_MODULES and CONFIG_HOTPLUG not set, everything else turned on
3. as much as possible modular
With 2.4.20 there are no compile errors with the first two and only two
errors at "depmod" with the third one (one of these two compile errors
is clearly pathological).
The bigger problem are unusual .config's, e.g. if you turn off common
things like CONFIG_PCI or CONFIG_NET.
Another example is that in 2.4.20 there's a problem with the compilation
of one specific net driver (fixed in 2.4.21-pre) if you select this
specific net driver and not additionally one or more of several other
net drivers.
Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a good solution for this problem
that doesn't need O(n^2) .config's for n kernel options.
> still thinking about reorganizing the overall option structure,
> rday
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-01-22 17:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-01-22 13:44 test suite? Robert P. J. Day
2003-01-22 15:59 ` Sam Ravnborg
2003-01-22 16:20 ` Robert P. J. Day
2003-01-22 16:28 ` Cliff White
2003-01-22 17:34 ` Adrian Bunk [this message]
[not found] <1043426077.1620.10.camel@localhost.localdomain>
2003-01-24 17:18 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-25 1:53 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-25 20:22 ` Hugh Dickins
2003-01-25 22:24 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-25 23:23 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-01-25 23:38 ` Martin J. Bligh
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=20030122173405.GF1733@fs.tum.de \
--to=bunk@fs.tum.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rpjday@mindspring.com \
/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