On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 11:26 PM Xabier Oneca -- xOneca
wrote:
> Is it mandatory to apply all upstream patches one by one to update
> Busybox's kconfig, or is it acceptable to make a "two stage" update in
> which I bring all changes in one commit plus customizations in another
> one?
Two
Hi Denys,
> "bbox" comments should be marking places where kernel's infrastructure
> was tweaked. There weren't many changes.
Yeah, I saw them in a couple of places, all around.
I've noticed that the main customization is for generating the file
autoconf.h with all values for
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 12:15 AM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 21:43:06 +0200 Xabier Oneca -- xOneca
> wrote:
> I'd start with a stable kernel tree from around that commit.
> What i do remember is that when i did
> f3d1e213fef45ba2df4090e9cd02217d1ef82f00
> there were
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 21:43:06 +0200
Xabier Oneca -- xOneca wrote:
> Hi Bernhard,
>
> > The usual way to update out kconfig was to pull the upstream version
> > from the kernel, refresh our patch (if we had one) and commit
> > both. We usually picked the current stable kernel version and
Hi Bernhard,
> The usual way to update out kconfig was to pull the upstream version
> from the kernel, refresh our patch (if we had one) and commit
> both. We usually picked the current stable kernel version and mentioned
> that version in the commit message for future reference and updates.
>
>
Hi Xabier,
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 19:20:22 +0200
Xabier Oneca -- xOneca wrote:
> This patch adds a more modern-looking interface using ncurses. The
> implementation does not depend on lxdialog, which is currently distributed
> with
> Busybox.
>
> The code is borrowed from the Linux kernel
inlined the patch because it is big.
Cheers,
Xabier Oneca_,,_
From b632597653307f7a7327c6f2af55aff0bef38e5e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Xabier Oneca
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2021 12:24:46 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] build system: new configuration interface (nconfig)
This patch adds a more modern
