Re: KBuild 2.5 Impressions

[Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net>]

On Friday 31 May 2002 03:20, Skip Ford wrote:
> Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > On Friday 31 May 2002 02:13, Kenneth Johansson wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2002-05-31 at 01:19, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > I think that with these breakups done the thing would be sufficiently
> > > > digestible to satisfy Linus.  Now that I think of it, Linus's request
> > > 
> > > Maybe I'm the idiot here but what dose this gain you??
> > >
> > > The reason to break up a patch is not simply to get more of them. There
> > > is no point in splitting if you still need to use every single one of
> > > them to make anything work. 
> > 
> > See above.  It's all about analyzing the structure of the patch.  To be
> > fair though, it took me less than an hour to get a pretty good idea of
> > how the current patch set is structured.
> 
> I could be wrong but I think Linus wants small patches that slowly
> convert kbuild24 to kbuild25, and not just a chopped up wholesale
> kbuild25.

I hope you're wrong, because that does not sound reasonable.  On the other
hand, the two build systems coexist quite happily in the same tree.  You
have to explicitly do the -f Makefile-2.5 for the new build system to kick
in.  So nobody is being asked to make any sudden change, people can convert
at their own convenience.

> There's a big difference between splitting kb25 into pieces and figuring
> out a way to migrate from kb24 to kb25 with small patches.  You're
> suggesting the former while Linus wants the latter.

If that's really a correct interpretation, it would be weird.  I hope it
isn't.

-- 
Daniel