On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 06:13:49PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2016-02-12 16:59, Ferruh Yigit: > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 04:04:07PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > 2016-02-12 14:31, Panu Matilainen: > > > > On 01/28/2016 04:31 PM, Bernard Iremonger wrote: > > > > > add config/defconfig_x86_64-default-linuxapp-gcc file. > > > > > > > > There was a related discussion back in March, see > > > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-March/014626.html > > > > > > > > I intended to go with that and submit patch(es) but the amount of > > > > duplication and new files gets mind-numbing when you make them for all > > > > existing targets. In other words, this approach doesn't scale. > > > > > > > > Thomas, I remember seeing a plan to include a configure script in DPDK > > > > many times in past months. Do you have something specific in mind, ie > > > > actually use autoconf or just a custom hand-written script named > > > > "configure" that roughly resembles autoconf configure or...? > > > > > > A script named "configure" looks fine. > > > Bruce introduced the idea of calling "make config" in the script: > > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-October/026256.html > > > Maybe it is a good start to move forward. > > > I think we have to choose between a script and a kconfig approach giving > > > the menus GUIs as bonus. > > > > > Another thing kconfig can help is to resolve dependencies, harder to make > > this with a > > script. Currently we already have dependencies, although not complex, and > > resolved > > within makefile. > > Dependencies are not so well resolved currently. > We have internal and external dependencies. > The internal ones would be better resolved with kconfig or a script. > The external dependencies are often managed by autotools but I'm sure > we prefer have a clean script instead of this beast ;) > > > I believe correct place to solve them is a configuration tool so that > > makefiles or > > source files can be clean. > > I think a configuration tool/script must help to make a working config. > But do you really think we should remove the gatekeepers in Makefiles? > I think we should remove combination of config related "if" checks from makefiles, "ENABLE-$(CONFIG_X) += y" should be sufficient.
And if CONFIG_X should be set or not is be problem of the config tool. Thanks, ferruh