2015-11-30 15:04, Jan Viktorin: > On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 14:59:45 +0100 > Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com> wrote: > > > 2015-11-30 14:27, Jan Viktorin: > > > I believe (and have already expressed this idea) that this is not a > > > problem of architecture ports but it is a problem of the build system. > > > Love me or hate me, in my opinion the build system is broken :). The > > > build system should be able to solve this. > > > > > > I've created privately an integration of kconfig into DPDK, however, it > > > is far from being usable and I did not have time to make at least an > > > RFC patch. If there is an attitude in the community to include such > > > thing in the future versions, I'd like to make some more effort in this > > > area. > > > > If we were integrating kconfig, we should consider kconfig-frontends > > (http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/projects/kconfig-frontends). > > True, this seems to be the easiest way. I've already used it > successfully. > > > But I'm not sure it is the way to go. You are welcome to open the debate > > in a dedicated thread by explaining the benefits compared to a configuration > > script. > > OK. I will consider this. Probably, after the community call... (Or > before?)
Please take your time. We will better ready to discuss it when the "make install" issue will be solved. > > I think most of the options could be automatically guessed given the target > > CPU, kernel, libc and compiler. It looks like a scripting task, not a > > manual configuration (as kconfig provides). But maybe we can mix kconfig > > and some automatic defaults. > > > > Well, scripting... If you have issues like "feature X" does not work > on "platform A" then you need to express this. If you try to script > such dependency, I am afraid you always end up with a system of the same > or equivalent complexity as the kconfig already has :). We'll see... I'm not speaking about complexity here, but just features. With kconfig, options and dependencies are well described but the defaults are fixed. With a script, you can have some dynamically generated defaults. Please expose the needs and features clearly in another thread. Thanks
