public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>,
	Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the i2c tree with the arm-current tree
Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 20:04:08 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090506190408.GC6897@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090506103138.79525cd0@hyperion.delvare>

On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 10:31:38AM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> I don't know exactly how defconfigs are handled, but I can imagine that
> the responsible developer is running "make oldconfig" on the system in
> question from times to times and copying the result back to the
> defconfig file. The purpose of updating defconfig files is to make
> configuration option renames transparent.

The big problem is that everyone 'make oldconfig' is done, the entire
config file essentially gets re-sorted into some other random order,
and the changes are massive.

If a platform maintainer does this, and the result is committed, and
some other person has done some small sed-based updates to the defconfigs,
the result is _total_ chaos.

That's why I'm arguing for my approach.  That way, platform maintainers
stand a better chance of seeing what happens to their defconfig files
and there's a substantially better chance of some coordination of those
changes (that is if the arch maintainer is doing their job properly.)

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:

      reply	other threads:[~2009-05-06 19:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-05-06  3:10 linux-next: manual merge of the i2c tree with the arm-current tree Stephen Rothwell
2009-05-06  7:15 ` Russell King
2009-05-06  7:25   ` Jean Delvare
2009-05-06 19:01     ` Russell King
2009-05-07  6:54       ` Jean Delvare
2009-05-06  8:31 ` Jean Delvare
2009-05-06 19:04   ` Russell King [this message]

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=20090506190408.GC6897@flint.arm.linux.org.uk \
    --to=rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=khali@linux-fr.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nico@cam.org \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    --cc=w.sang@pengutronix.de \
    /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