Re: kbuild 2.5 is ready for inclusion in the 2.5 kernel

[Dan Kegel <dank@kegel.com>]

Richard Gooch wrote:
> As Keith says, the new code is faster and more robust than the old
> code. Given that tracking kernel drift is a significant load on him,
> it makes sense to incorporate the new code now. Once it's in, let
> people get used to it and then we can look at optimising it, if need
> be. Delaying introduction into the kernel tree because it's not 100%
> optimised is wasteful.

Keith also says:
> I am temporarily omitting [modversions] which is (a) currently broken
> (b) is not being used in development kernels and (c) cannot be fixed
> without a radical redesign.  Modversions is not needed right now and
> will be added later.  Everything I have done in kbuild 2.5 is needed
> now

[Caveat: I'm not much of a kernel hacker.]
My only concern with kbuild 2.5 was the lack of modversions,
but since Richard is promising to add them in before the
distros need them, I would have no qualms about kbuild 2.5
totally replacing the old build system for the next 2.5 kernel.
I'm sick and tired of 'make dep'.

What does Alan Cox think?
- Dan