Re: Converting the 2.5 kernel to kbuild 2.5

Cameron Simpson
2001-12-05T02:00:12Z

On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 05:44:19PM +0000, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
| > After CML2 has proven itself in 2.5, I do plan to go back to Marcelo
| > and lobby for him accepting it into 2.4, on the grounds that doing so
| > will simplify his maintainance task no end. That's why I'm tracking
| > both sides of the fork in the rulebase, so it will be an easy drop-in
| > replacement for Marcelo as well as Linus.
|
| Thats somewhat impractical. You will break all the existing additional
| configuration tools for the 2.4 stable tree that people expect to continue
| to work
|
| Breaking them in 2.5 isnt a big issue, but breaking stable kernel trees
| is a complete nono

Folks, have you forgotten that you're programmers?

ESR, is it practical to have CML2 transcribe a CML1 config file?
Then as part of the build-the-kernel-src-tarball, Marcelo or whoever's
make target runs the transcriber.

This would let people fetch a kernel and build with the old tools
for personal hacking purposes which keeping the source config in CML2
which is cleans and more powerful. Kernel code _authors_ would need to
write in CML2, but not kernel end users.
--
Cameron Simpson, DoD#743 cs@zip.com.au http://www.zip.com.au/~cs/

A motorcycle is like a toothbrush. Everyone should have their own.
- roserunr@noller.com