On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Roman Zippel wrote: > > I don't think anyone who actually understands the config system would > > argue these points, but we are limited by practical constraints to making > > incremental improvements only. > > That's fine with me, but nonetheless I'd really like to know where it will > go to. Just fixing the easy problems is simple, but so far I haven't seen > any plan on how to fix the hard problems. Anyone starting to fix all the > problems should have at least some ideas how to do it and I'd really like > to hear them. I don't want to discourage anyone, but he should understand > the complete problem first before going for the easy targets.
I think concentrating on the small gotchas for now is a good thing. Surely not all conceptual problems are fixable easily, they probably need to be done in conjunction with switching to a common parser etc. (Note: this switch to a new parser should happen with no change to the config.in format or semantics, in order to fit the Linux/Linus way of doing things). However, I think it is too late in 2.5 for these kind of big changes. That doesn't mean that fixing bugs, of which there are plenty, and small improvements like "" == "n" where possible shouldn't be done. If nothing else, it will at least give a better starting point for more elaborate work later. --Kai ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 _______________________________________________ kbuild-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kbuild-devel
