On Mon, 21 May 2001 16:38:34 -0400,
John Stoffel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>All that CML2 does is enforce dependencies in the configuration
>language. You can't make a .config which conflicts. Admittedly
>there's nothing stopping you from hacking it with vi after the fact,
>but why?
CML2 will not stop you hacking .config by hand. But the 2.5 makefile
rewrite will, because we have had too many bug reports caused by people
who hand edited .config, did not revalidate it and generated invalid
kernels. Yes, you can hand edit .config. No, you cannot compile until
.config has been (re-)validated.
# Not a real dependency, this checks for hand editing of .config.
$(KBUILD_OBJTREE)include/linux/autoconf.h: $(KBUILD_OBJTREE).config
@echo Your .config is newer than include/linux/autoconf.h, this should not
happen.
@echo Always run make one of "{menu,old,x}config" after manually updating
.config.
@/bin/false
And before people complain: Don't create a config that violates the CML
rules, correct the CML rules, the Makefiles and the source so .config
is valid. The kernel build requires a valid .config.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... Arjan van de Ven
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... M.
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... Nicolas Pitre
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... David Woodhouse
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... Eric S. Raymond
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... David Woodhouse
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... Eric S. Raymond
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... David Woodhouse
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... John Stoffel
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... Jonathan Morton
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... Keith Owens
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... Daniel Phillips
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... Keith Owens
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... David Woodhouse
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... John Stoffel
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... David Woodhouse
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... Nicolas Pitre
- Re: Background to the argument about CML2 design... David Woodhouse
- Re: CML2 design philosophy heads-up Jonathan Morton
- Re: CML2 design philosophy heads-up Eric S. Raymond
- Re: CML2 design philosophy heads-up Mike Galbraith

