On Wed, 4 Jul 2001, McMechan, Jim wrote:
> One thought that occurred to me was that perhaps the CML2 tool could
> be reused It already has multiple architectures, checkboxes, radio
> buttons and text entry fields and is very similar to the current Linux
> kernel build process.
I looked at it but was not real happy with it. CML2 seemed to be very
specific to the way linux builds kernels (recursive make, .o in the same
tree as the .c, etc.) and for linuxbios this is a broken way to do things.
I'm a lot more impressed with the BSD and Plan9 config and build process,
both of which we borrow ideas from (the config idea from BSD, and the new
superio architecture was a direct copy of how plan9 does things for its
kernel config).
> There is an active development/testing and it has all three (text,
> curses, GUI) interfaces ( and of course number four the Adventure
> interface)
I have to admit I like it in this one way.
It's a good suggestion but lest we forget: The user-visible config is
incredibly simple, typically 9 lines. The issues are slightly different
than for linux build tools because once you pick a mainboard you are
incredibly constrained in what you can choose after that.
ron
