On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 08:25:31AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 14.07.2021 18:17, Anthony PERARD wrote: > > --- a/xen/common/Kconfig > > +++ b/xen/common/Kconfig > > @@ -25,6 +25,9 @@ config GRANT_TABLE > > config HAS_ALTERNATIVE > > bool > > > > +config HAS_CHECKPOLICY > > + def_bool $(success,$(CHECKPOLICY) -h 2>&1 | grep -q xen) > > + > > This is no different from other aspects of "Kconfig vs tool chain > capabilities" sent out last August to start a discussion about > whether we really want such. Besides Jürgen no-one cared to reply > iirc, which to me means no-one really cares one way or the other. > Which I didn't think was the case ... So here we are again, with > all the same questions still open.
It's true, I don't really care either way. But with maybe a slight preference for testing the environment every time `make` is run. But there weren't really a precedent for testing in Makefile and using the result in Kconfig (or I don't think there is). > I'm not going to nack the patch, because there's an immediate > purpose / need, but I also can't avoid commenting (and I won't > put my name on it in any positive way, i.e. also not as a > committer; if anything then to record my reservations). I've prepared an update which test in Makefile, which I hope you'll like better. Thanks, -- Anthony PERARD
