Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote:
>
> > We could use some more infrastructure here.
> >
> > (1) A 'make randomconfig' tool that generates a random configuration.
> >
> > (2) Make the architecture a configuration variable (!)
> >
> > (3) A collection of RPM's so that people can download and install
> > all the cross tools easily.
>
> (0) knowledge that CONFIG_FOO15 doesn't affect anything other than set of
> source files being compiled.
>
> Providing better tools is nice, but simplifying the problem domain
> sometimes pays better...
<IRONY ON>
So may I just suggest to repleace the usage of cpp at all with something
more
suitable for the task at hand and with a much more regular/stringent
syntax
better fitting into the syntax of the pure C language like m4 for
example?
</IRONY OFF>
<EVEN MORE IRONY ON>
I think Java has the perfect solution for conditional compilation -
don't
make it possible at al in a sane standard way! Coditional compilation is
evil
like gotos (despite the fact that even every pascal implementation out
there
provided them).
</EVEN MORE IRONY OFF>
The main problem with the CONFIG_ blah's isn't either the syntax nor
they current usage - the problem is inherent to the simple fact
that the number of possible combinations is of a very high order due
to simple combinatorics.
Hmm maybe the first irony is a quite serious suggestion at least in
the case of CONFIG_ options?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
