Re: [RFC PATCH] kconfig: use long options in conf

[Aristeu Rozanski <aris@redhat.com>]

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 09:34:55PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> If you have a simple command that give you a list of new
> symbols then this is easy to script as Michal also
> shows with the below example.
> 
> > > How about
> > > new=$(make listnewconfig)
> > > if test -n "$new"; then
> > >     echo "Please set the following options:" >&2
> > >     echo "$new" >&2
> > >     exit 1
> > > fi
> > > ? Wouldn't that be the same as nonint_oldconfig before?
> > what's the other use cases for listnewconfig (other than a incomplete
> > nonint_oldconfig)?
> 
> listnewconfig is for everyone that like to see a list of new
> config options - without touching the current configuration.
> 
> By limiting listnewconfig to do only one thing you actually
> create further uses than before.
> 
> This is not about how well it applies to the tailored
> use in redhat's current scripts.
*sigh* I think we have people able to handle such complex changes.

this is not what it's about. I don't care how it's called or if scripts
will need to be changed. What I want to know is if either:
a) we're reducing functionality of something in order to support more *real*
   use cases with the same code, making it more generic;
or
b) we're reducing functionality based in theorical use cases.

if it's (a), you get my ACK

-- 
Aristeu