Manuel Bouyer <bou...@antioche.eu.org> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 03, 2011 at 04:17:02PM +0100, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: > > Manuel Bouyer <bou...@antioche.eu.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > - Obviously, defined policy/responsibility to disable these options > > > > for release kernels. In fact, if we go this way - then options > > > > should be removed from all MD kernel configs and managed in MI > > > > src/sys/conf/std. > > > > > > I'm not sure this is doable: some ports may want to keep DIAGNOSTIC in > > > release branches, while others may want to exclude DIAGNOSTIC from > > > some kernels on HEAD (for example because of space constraints). > > > > Why not? Such ports can still define the option in their configs. > > Also, > > No because you'll then have "already have options `DIAGNOSTIC'" from > config.
Yes, that would be an extra headache for release branch (perhaps one could make it easier with some config magic). However, expectation of release branch is a stable kernel. Why do you want to distribute Xen kernel with inconsistent options (vs x86) and against policy? -- Mindaugas
