On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:08:08PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 11:45 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > > Of course the kbuild system would need to verify that the selects exist, > > > and perhaps warn if they do not. But the nice thing about this is that > > > you would get the minconfig for the system you are running. When the > > > system is updated to a new version, the minconfig would be updated too. > > > The list of selects would not have to live in the kernel, nor would the > > > kernel need to maintain the list for N+1 different distributions. > > > > Is there a reason you don't want distro maintainers to maintain these > > files in the upstream git tree? (You said "the kernel need to > > maintain", but I would expect the distro maintainers to be doing that > > work.) > > > > I think it would actually be beneficial to maintain them upstream > > instead of in distro kernel packaging. You'd be able to track the > > history of changes with git. You would see for a given kernel > > version what options are set for each distro (e.g. F17 can support > > NEW_FOO_THING but F16 userspace can't so it doesn't select that). > > Perhaps most importantly, it provides a consolidated view of what > > options various distros are setting and allows the distro maintainers to > > easily do comparisons. > > Then we'll have a list of options in each kernel: > > Fedora 16 > Fedora 17 > Fedora 18 > [...] > Debian x > Debian x+1 > Debian x+2 > [...] > Ubuntu y > Ubuntu y+1 > [...]
Well, yes. I was thinking it would be more like: distro/Kconfig.fedora menuconfig FEDORA if FEDORA config FEDORA_16 select WHATEVER config FEDORA_17 ... distro/Kconfig.debian menuconfig DEBIAN if DEBIAN config DEBIAN_X ... etc. Not one giant distro file with a bunch of varying distros doing a bunch of selects. But in general, yes there would be options for each supported distro release. > What about older kernels? Say you installed Fedora 18 with an older > kernel that doesn't know what to select? Having the distro tell the > kernel what it needs seems to me the easiest for the 99% case. How is the above not telling the kernel what it needs? I'm confused how the location of such a file makes it's functionality and usefulness differ... Quite possible I missed what you meant originally, but it sounds like we're talking about the same thing? Also, I'm not very convinced the 99% are going to be wanting to install shiny new versions of a distro with a kernel older than what the distro ships with. I could be very wrong, but it seems like in-general the whole premise of this RFC was geared towards using new kernels on distros. > Also, if something isn't supported by the older kernel, it would warn > the user about it. That way the user can be told that their older kernel > won't work with this version of the distro. And there wont be as many > surprises. If the user is told "your init wont work with this kernel" > before they compile it, then they shouldn't complain if they decide to > install this older kernel and their box doesn't boot. kconfig already spits out warnings for symbols being selected that don't exist. josh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/