On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 23:05:57 +0100 Simon Arlott wrote:
What about something like this? I'm not sure if the addition to
sym_init is desirable... I also had to prefix _ to the name for
now otherwise it conflicts badly with the current symbols. It
On Sat, 1 Sep 2007, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 06:44:06AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
while (1) {
printf(%*s%s , indent - 1, , menu-prompt-text);
+ switch (sym-maturity) {
+ case M_EXPERIMENTAL:
+
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 23:05:57 +0100 Simon Arlott wrote:
On 19/07/07 17:19, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
I think that Stefan means a patch to the kconfig source code,
not the the Kconfig files. Good luck. I'd still like to see it.
yes, i understand
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 23:05:57 +0100 Simon Arlott wrote:
On 19/07/07 17:19, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
I think that Stefan means a patch to the kconfig source code,
not the the Kconfig files. Good luck.
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 23:05:57 +0100 Simon Arlott wrote:
On 19/07/07 17:19, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
I think that Stefan means a patch to the kconfig source code,
not the the Kconfig
On Aug 31 2007 14:06, Jeff Garzik wrote:
something like BROKEN, though, has *nothing* to do with maturity. a
feature can be any of those maturity levels, and simultaneously be
BROKEN. i consider BROKEN to be what i call a status, and different
status levels might be the default of normal,
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
i'm sure i'm going to get shouted down here, but i really disagree
with BROKEN being considered a maturity level. IMHO, things
like EXPERIMENTAL, DEPRECATED and OBSOLETE represent maturity
levels, for what i think are
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
What I like about the patch is that it associates some kconfig
symbol with prompt strings, so that we don't have to edit
(EXPERIMENTAL) all the darn time (e.g.).
I'd be quite happy with calling it status rather than maturity,
and with being able to
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 17:00:57 -0400 (EDT) Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
What I like about the patch is that it associates some kconfig
symbol with prompt strings, so that we don't have to edit
(EXPERIMENTAL) all the darn time (e.g.).
I'd be quite
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
i'm sure i'm going to get shouted down here, but i really disagree
with BROKEN being considered a maturity level. IMHO, things
like EXPERIMENTAL, DEPRECATED and OBSOLETE represent maturity
levels, for
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote:
'deprecrated' and 'obsolete' are matters of discussed opinion,
describing the utility of the code in question. 'broken' describes
the state of the code itself.
Clear difference.
precisely. thank you for making my point for me.
rday
--
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 05:18:20PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 04:51:33PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:23:09 -0400 (EDT)
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
...
I would consider it more ugly to special case this and that in the
kconfig code when plain dependencies already offer exactly the same
functionality...
well, this is the *third* time i've proposed adding this kind of
feature so, at this point, i've
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
...
I would consider it more ugly to special case this and that in the
kconfig code when plain dependencies already offer exactly the same
functionality...
well, this is the *third* time i've proposed adding this kind of
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
...
I would consider it more ugly to special case this and that in the
kconfig code when plain dependencies already offer exactly the same
functionality...
well, this is the
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
i *did* submit a preliminary patch once upon a time, and it
(predictably) went nowhere.
A patch which pulls the word experimental into prompts or adds a
dedicated directive for tagging of options? Can't find it in archives.
--
Stefan Richter
-=-=-=== -=== =--==
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 05:25:30 -0400 (EDT) Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
...
I would consider it more ugly to special case this and that in the
kconfig code when plain
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 05:25:30 -0400 (EDT) Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
...
I would consider it more ugly to special case this and
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Simon Arlott wrote:
On 19/07/07 17:19, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
I think that Stefan means a patch to the kconfig source code,
not the the Kconfig files. Good luck. I'd still like to see it.
yes, i understand what he wanted
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Gabriel C wrote:
Everything 'depends on' EXPERIMENTAL should be marked as such,
visible in the menus.
rather than add all that extraneous dreck to the Kconfig files, i
*really* wish folks would give serious thought to my earlier
suggestion about a maturity level attribute
Everything 'depends on' EXPERIMENTAL should be marked as such, visible in the
menus.
Signed-off-by: Gabriel Craciunescu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
drivers/net/irda/Kconfig | 14 +++---
drivers/net/usb/Kconfig |4 ++--
drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:23:09 -0400 (EDT) Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Gabriel C wrote:
Everything 'depends on' EXPERIMENTAL should be marked as such,
visible in the menus.
rather than add all that extraneous dreck to the Kconfig files, i
*really* wish folks would give
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:23:09 -0400 (EDT) Robert P. J. Day wrote:
there's no point adding all that redundant content when it can all be
done automatically.
I like it. Are there any kconfig patches to support this plan?
Speaking specifically to adding 'EXPERIMENTAL', I
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:23:09 -0400 (EDT) Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Gabriel C wrote:
Everything 'depends on' EXPERIMENTAL should be marked as such,
visible in the menus.
rather than add all that extraneous dreck to the
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Gabriel C wrote:
Everything 'depends on' EXPERIMENTAL should be marked as such,
visible in the menus.
rather than add all that extraneous dreck to the Kconfig files, i
*really* wish folks would give serious thought to my earlier
suggestion
Jeff Garzik wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:23:09 -0400 (EDT) Robert P. J. Day wrote:
there's no point adding all that redundant content when it can all be
done automatically.
I like it. Are there any kconfig patches to support this plan?
Speaking specifically to adding
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:23:09 -0400 (EDT) Robert P. J. Day wrote:
there's no point adding all that redundant content when it can all be
done automatically.
I like it. Are there any kconfig patches to support this plan?
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 04:51:33PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:23:09 -0400 (EDT) Robert P. J. Day wrote:
there's no point adding all that redundant content when it can all be
done automatically.
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 04:51:33PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:23:09 -0400 (EDT) Robert P. J. Day wrote:
there's no point adding all that redundant
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
If you are not doing it, noone might do it. And discusing
improvements noone will implement is somehow pointless...
sure, i'm willing to help, but i don't think doing *nothing* about it
is an option. you may not like gabriel's proposed patch, but you
30 matches
Mail list logo
