Eric Raymond`s CML2 configuration generator

Eric Raymond`s CML2 configuration generator

[Samium Gromoff]

		The question is why the utterly beautiful generator was dropped?

		Its good side  was in its inability  to get an invalid kernel
 		 configuration.

		One of the obvious problems is that it was python-based, and thus being slow and
		requiring python to be installed.
		So what if it was written in C?

		Is it possible for it to get in before 2.6?

regards, Samium Gromoff
		

Re: Eric Raymond`s CML2 configuration generator

[Alan Cox]

On Gwe, 2003-04-04 at 11:04, Samium Gromoff wrote:
> 		The question is why the utterly beautiful generator was dropped?

It required a complete mangling of the config files
It didn't include automated tools to do it
It required python2
It didn't support alternative config tools
And a few other things

> 		So what if it was written in C?

It would look something like the Qt and Gtk tools we have, and
improving those is a good thing.

Re: Eric Raymond`s CML2 configuration generator

[Dave Jones]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 02:04:10PM +0400, Samium Gromoff wrote:

 > 		The question is why the utterly beautiful generator was dropped?

overengineering, and not listening to the requests of people
that would spend the most time using it, instead pandoring to
the needs of figments of Erics imagination. The day Eric stopped
listening to kernel developers, kernel developers stopped listening
to Eric.

 > 		One of the obvious problems is that it was python-based, and thus being slow and
 > 		requiring python to be installed.
 > 		So what if it was written in C?

not an issue.

 > 		Is it possible for it to get in before 2.6?

no. we're well into freeze now, and ripping out something of
that size would be a major step backwards.
Besides, Roman Zippel's kconfig work got merged instead,
which is a large improvement over what we had in 2.4

		Dave