On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 01:41:33AM +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote: > On Saturday 28 July 2012 21:19:44 Alan McKinnon wrote: > > > I use both: > > Me too (sorry), though I find myself using oldconfig more often than > menuconfig these days, unless I want to comb right through the config > looking for things I could improve. > > > first oldconfig to find the newly added stuff...then menuconfig, mostly > > looking for driver pages that have lots of things set - I can't > > possibly have all of that hardware so logically few things must be > > set. menuconfig also lets me easily see things I hve never explicitly > > set (which oldconfig can't do) and labels them (NEW) which is > > distinctly different to what oldconfig calls new stuff > > Is it really? I thought they ought to be the same. And the only snag > with menuconfig for finding new options is that you have to navigate every > single menu - quite time-consuming*. > > > And in menuconfig, the / key engages search, just like in vim > > Ah. I knew about the ? key since it's in the prompt. Seems I can drop > the shift. Ta. > > * Speaking of consuming time, would someone with an i7 please tell me > how long it takes to compile a new kernel? I'd like to compare it with > my i5, which after mrproper and copying the .config in from /boot, where > I store it for safe keeping, was 2 min 7 sec just now. (This is related > to another thread; perhaps I should have asked this there instead.)
Just by way of comparison, my Centrino laptop does it in about an hour flat. Terry
