On 18/07/12 10:55, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> Linus,
>
>> The point I'm slowly getting to is that I would actually love to have
>> *distro* Kconfig-files, where the distribution would be able to say
>> "These are the minimums I *require* to work". So we'd have a "Distro"
>> submenu, where you could
On 18/07/12 10:55, Tom Gundersen wrote:
Linus,
The point I'm slowly getting to is that I would actually love to have
*distro* Kconfig-files, where the distribution would be able to say
These are the minimums I *require* to work. So we'd have a Distro
submenu, where you could pick the
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:56:50 -0400, Josh Boyer said:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 01:33:42PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > What happens if someone does a yum update, and the kernel requirement
> > changes slightly. The yum update should update
> > this /usr/share/Linux/Kconfig. But it's still set
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:56:50 -0400, Josh Boyer said:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 01:33:42PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
What happens if someone does a yum update, and the kernel requirement
changes slightly. The yum update should update
this /usr/share/Linux/Kconfig. But it's still set at
>
> But we'll first have to make 'select' to actually work, right? It
> currently doesn't resolve the dependencies of the selected configs, so it
> will just produce some very broken config.
We could restrict "select" to only select symbols with no dependencies,
or *exactly* the same
On Fri, 13 Jul 2012, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> So this has long been one of my pet configuration peeves: as a user I
> am perfectly happy answering the questions about what kinds of
> hardware I want the kernel to support (I kind of know that), but many
> of the "support infrastructure" questions
On Fri, 13 Jul 2012, Linus Torvalds wrote:
So this has long been one of my pet configuration peeves: as a user I
am perfectly happy answering the questions about what kinds of
hardware I want the kernel to support (I kind of know that), but many
of the support infrastructure questions are
But we'll first have to make 'select' to actually work, right? It
currently doesn't resolve the dependencies of the selected configs, so it
will just produce some very broken config.
We could restrict select to only select symbols with no dependencies,
or *exactly* the same dependencies as
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 06:30:47PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
For the end user case you need the distro to plonk the right file in the
right place and be done with it, once they do that the rest is
bikeshedding a ten line Makefile rule.
This might work
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 18:35 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > >2... yeah. I don't really know if that is going to pan out, but I am
> > >ever hopeful. I'd be mostly concerned with people that are coding
> > >userspace applications using every whiz-bang kernel feature. Or not
> > >paying attention
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 02:04:11PM -0700, da...@lang.hm wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> >On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 02:13:40PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >>On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:56 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >>
> >>>Distros aren't stationary things.
> >>
> >>Exactly my
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 08:20:36PM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
>> On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:19 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> > kconfig already spits out warnings for symbols being selected that
>> > don't exist.
>>
>> Does it? Since when does it do
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 06:30:47PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > Well, yes. I was thinking it would be more like:
> >
> > distro/Kconfig.fedora
> > menuconfig FEDORA
> > if FEDORA
> > config FEDORA_16
> >select WHATEVER
> > config FEDORA_17
>
> Nope you need
>
>
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 02:13:40PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:56 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
Distros aren't stationary things.
Exactly my point.
I mean, some of them certainly aim
for that goal, but userspace and kernels
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 20:49 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > I believe Alan was more correct than me when he said it was 'make
> > oldconfig' that produced the warnings.
>
> Kconfig does spit out warnings for selecting things with unmet dependencies.
> But does anyone care?
>
> [...checking
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 07:53:10PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:06:44AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > >
> > > Seriously, this helps only in the cases where the stuff the distro
> > > actually needs is in
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 08:20:36PM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
>> On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:19 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> > kconfig already spits out warnings for symbols being selected that
>> > don't exist.
>
>> Does it? Since when does it do
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 02:13:40PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:56 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> > Distros aren't stationary things.
>
> Exactly my point.
>
> > I mean, some of them certainly aim
> > for that goal, but userspace and kernels get upgraded all the time.
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 08:20:36PM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:19 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > kconfig already spits out warnings for symbols being selected that
> > don't exist.
>
> Does it? Since when does it do that? Or do you mean select in a more
> general way (not
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:19 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> kconfig already spits out warnings for symbols being selected that
> don't exist.
Does it? Since when does it do that? Or do you mean select in a more
general way (not just meaning Kconfig's "select" statement)?
Paul Bolle
--
To
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:56 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> Distros aren't stationary things.
Exactly my point.
> I mean, some of them certainly aim
> for that goal, but userspace and kernels get upgraded all the time. So
> if this distro-Kconfig file is provided by some package _other_ than the
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 01:57:26PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Yes, I know you know this already, as we discussed it in a pub over a
> beer (choir practice). But this is a public forum on LKML (the church),
> where I now have an audience of heathens. Convert! Convert! You are all
> sinners!
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 19:34 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > I can pass the above to a allnoconfig, and the box will boot and allow
> > ssh. Note, the reason for the serial config, is that this ktest run uses
> > a serial port to see if the box booted. If the serial isn't there, then
> > it
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 01:33:42PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:19 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> > > What about older kernels? Say you installed Fedora 18 with an older
> > > kernel that doesn't know what to select? Having the distro tell the
> > > kernel what it needs
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:06:44AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> >
> > Seriously, this helps only in the cases where the stuff the distro
> > actually needs is in modules. So, there probably are obscure situations
> > where you need to
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 06:30:47PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > Well, yes. I was thinking it would be more like:
> >
> > distro/Kconfig.fedora
> > menuconfig FEDORA
> > if FEDORA
> > config FEDORA_16
> >select WHATEVER
> > config FEDORA_17
>
> Nope you need
>
>
> > kconfig already spits out warnings for symbols being selected that
> > don't exist.
>
> We can make these even bigger :-) Add lots of stars (*) around them!
Make oldconfig already handles this just fine
Alan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 01:02:46PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> This is why I created the make-min-config in ktest. It keeps on
> disabling configs to see what the machine needs to boot (and optionally
> run some test), and what configs it can disable. It does not touch the
> multi options
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:19 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > What about older kernels? Say you installed Fedora 18 with an older
> > kernel that doesn't know what to select? Having the distro tell the
> > kernel what it needs seems to me the easiest for the 99% case.
>
> How is the above not telling
> Well, yes. I was thinking it would be more like:
>
> distro/Kconfig.fedora
> menuconfig FEDORA
> if FEDORA
> config FEDORA_16
> select WHATEVER
> config FEDORA_17
Nope you need
distro/everyarchtheyship/everykernelvarianttkeyship(smp,largemem,arm
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:08:08PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 11:45 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > Of course the kbuild system would need to verify that the selects exist,
> > > and perhaps warn if they do not. But the nice thing about this is that
> > > you would get the
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> Seriously, this helps only in the cases where the stuff the distro
> actually needs is in modules. So, there probably are obscure situations
> where you need to enable stuff which is bool and not M.
Sadly, not obscure at all.
Most of
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 18:48 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > Also, if you are building on another box than what the kernel is for,
> > you can go to that box and run 'lsmod > /tmp/lsmod'. Copy that file to
> > the build machine (into /tmp/lsmod), and then run
> > 'make LSMOD=/tmp/lsmod
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:42:17AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 07:48:27PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> >
> > Let's have an example: when I have to build upstream on a distro here,
> > I take the distro config and use it despite that it takes a long time
> > to build
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 08:43 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 8:26 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > Side note, and this is for the 1%. If you want a true minconfig for your
> > system, ktest can do that for you.
>
> Try it, it's actually much harder than it seems. Like
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 11:45 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> Of course the kbuild system would need to verify that the selects exist,
> > and perhaps warn if they do not. But the nice thing about this is that
> > you would get the minconfig for the system you are running. When the
> > system is updated
On 17.7.2012 10:03, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:26 PM, wrote:
>>> Some of the proposed ways to implement the minimum distro kernel would not
>>> allow you to override the distro defaults because they would
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 11:26:18AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 02:17:30PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > The *two* requirements (and they're really the same theme) I
> > personally think we should have for this are
> >
> > - I think every single "select" for
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 8:26 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> Side note, and this is for the 1%. If you want a true minconfig for your
> system, ktest can do that for you.
Try it, it's actually much harder than it seems. Like allmodconfig, it
handles the minimum hardware well, but it tends to
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 02:17:30PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> The *two* requirements (and they're really the same theme) I
> personally think we should have for this are
>
> - I think every single "select" for these things should come with a
> comment about what it is about and why the
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 07:48:27PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> Let's have an example: when I have to build upstream on a distro here,
> I take the distro config and use it despite that it takes a long time
> to build since everything is module - it is still better for me to
> wait that one
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 07:48:27PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
Let's have an example: when I have to build upstream on a distro here,
I take the distro config and use it despite that it takes a long time
to build since everything is module - it is still better for me to
wait that one time
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 02:17:30PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
The *two* requirements (and they're really the same theme) I
personally think we should have for this are
- I think every single select for these things should come with a
comment about what it is about and why the distro
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 8:26 AM, Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org wrote:
Side note, and this is for the 1%. If you want a true minconfig for your
system, ktest can do that for you.
Try it, it's actually much harder than it seems. Like allmodconfig, it
handles the minimum hardware well, but
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 11:26:18AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 02:17:30PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
The *two* requirements (and they're really the same theme) I
personally think we should have for this are
- I think every single select for these things
On 17.7.2012 10:03, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Linus Torvalds
torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:26 PM, da...@lang.hm wrote:
Some of the proposed ways to implement the minimum distro kernel would not
allow you to override the
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 11:45 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
Of course the kbuild system would need to verify that the selects exist,
and perhaps warn if they do not. But the nice thing about this is that
you would get the minconfig for the system you are running. When the
system is updated to a
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 08:43 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 8:26 AM, Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org wrote:
Side note, and this is for the 1%. If you want a true minconfig for your
system, ktest can do that for you.
Try it, it's actually much harder than it seems.
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:42:17AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 07:48:27PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
Let's have an example: when I have to build upstream on a distro here,
I take the distro config and use it despite that it takes a long time
to build since
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 18:48 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
Also, if you are building on another box than what the kernel is for,
you can go to that box and run 'lsmod /tmp/lsmod'. Copy that file to
the build machine (into /tmp/lsmod), and then run
'make LSMOD=/tmp/lsmod localmodconfig',
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Borislav Petkov b...@amd64.org wrote:
Seriously, this helps only in the cases where the stuff the distro
actually needs is in modules. So, there probably are obscure situations
where you need to enable stuff which is bool and not M.
Sadly, not obscure at all.
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:08:08PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 11:45 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
Of course the kbuild system would need to verify that the selects exist,
and perhaps warn if they do not. But the nice thing about this is that
you would get the minconfig
Well, yes. I was thinking it would be more like:
distro/Kconfig.fedora
menuconfig FEDORA
if FEDORA
config FEDORA_16
select WHATEVER
config FEDORA_17
Nope you need
distro/everyarchtheyship/everykernelvarianttkeyship(smp,largemem,arm
boards)/Kconfig
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:19 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
What about older kernels? Say you installed Fedora 18 with an older
kernel that doesn't know what to select? Having the distro tell the
kernel what it needs seems to me the easiest for the 99% case.
How is the above not telling the
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 01:02:46PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
This is why I created the make-min-config in ktest. It keeps on
disabling configs to see what the machine needs to boot (and optionally
run some test), and what configs it can disable. It does not touch the
multi options though.
kconfig already spits out warnings for symbols being selected that
don't exist.
We can make these even bigger :-) Add lots of stars (*) around them!
Make oldconfig already handles this just fine
Alan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 06:30:47PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
Well, yes. I was thinking it would be more like:
distro/Kconfig.fedora
menuconfig FEDORA
if FEDORA
config FEDORA_16
select WHATEVER
config FEDORA_17
Nope you need
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:06:44AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Borislav Petkov b...@amd64.org wrote:
Seriously, this helps only in the cases where the stuff the distro
actually needs is in modules. So, there probably are obscure situations
where you need
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 01:33:42PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:19 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
What about older kernels? Say you installed Fedora 18 with an older
kernel that doesn't know what to select? Having the distro tell the
kernel what it needs seems to me
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 19:34 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
I can pass the above to a allnoconfig, and the box will boot and allow
ssh. Note, the reason for the serial config, is that this ktest run uses
a serial port to see if the box booted. If the serial isn't there, then
it thinks it
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 01:57:26PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
Yes, I know you know this already, as we discussed it in a pub over a
beer (choir practice). But this is a public forum on LKML (the church),
where I now have an audience of heathens. Convert! Convert! You are all
sinners!
Ah,
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:56 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
Distros aren't stationary things.
Exactly my point.
I mean, some of them certainly aim
for that goal, but userspace and kernels get upgraded all the time. So
if this distro-Kconfig file is provided by some package _other_ than the
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:19 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
kconfig already spits out warnings for symbols being selected that
don't exist.
Does it? Since when does it do that? Or do you mean select in a more
general way (not just meaning Kconfig's select statement)?
Paul Bolle
--
To unsubscribe
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 08:20:36PM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:19 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
kconfig already spits out warnings for symbols being selected that
don't exist.
Does it? Since when does it do that? Or do you mean select in a more
general way (not just
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 02:13:40PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:56 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
Distros aren't stationary things.
Exactly my point.
I mean, some of them certainly aim
for that goal, but userspace and kernels get upgraded all the time. So
if
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 08:20:36PM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:19 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
kconfig already spits out warnings for symbols being selected that
don't exist.
Does it? Since when does it
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 07:53:10PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:06:44AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Borislav Petkov b...@amd64.org wrote:
Seriously, this helps only in the cases where the stuff the distro
actually needs is
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 20:49 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
I believe Alan was more correct than me when he said it was 'make
oldconfig' that produced the warnings.
Kconfig does spit out warnings for selecting things with unmet dependencies.
But does anyone care?
[...checking logs...]
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 02:13:40PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:56 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
Distros aren't stationary things.
Exactly my point.
I mean, some of them certainly aim
for that goal, but userspace and kernels
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 06:30:47PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
Well, yes. I was thinking it would be more like:
distro/Kconfig.fedora
menuconfig FEDORA
if FEDORA
config FEDORA_16
select WHATEVER
config FEDORA_17
Nope you need
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 08:20:36PM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:19 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
kconfig already spits out warnings for symbols being selected that
don't exist.
Does it? Since when does it
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 02:04:11PM -0700, da...@lang.hm wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 02:13:40PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:56 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
Distros aren't stationary things.
Exactly my point.
I mean,
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 18:35 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
2... yeah. I don't really know if that is going to pan out, but I am
ever hopeful. I'd be mostly concerned with people that are coding
userspace applications using every whiz-bang kernel feature. Or not
paying attention at all to the
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 06:30:47PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
For the end user case you need the distro to plonk the right file in the
right place and be done with it, once they do that the rest is
bikeshedding a ten line Makefile rule.
This might work
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 4:37 AM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> In addition to the "minimal distro settings", we might also have a few
> "common platform" settings, so that you could basically do a "hey, I
> have a modern PC laptop, make it pick the obvious stuff that a normal
> person needs, like USB
Linus,
[sorry for the messed up threading, I could not figure out how to make
gmail use in-relp-to]
> The point I'm slowly getting to is that I would actually love to have
> *distro* Kconfig-files, where the distribution would be able to say
> "These are the minimums I *require* to work". So
* da...@lang.hm wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2012, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> >* da...@lang.hm wrote:
> >
> >>>Anybody who says "I want to run Fedora without SELINUX
> >>>because I do my own security development" is by *definition*
> >>>not relevant to the whole feature.
> >>
> >>Don't mistake the
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* da...@lang.hm wrote:
Anybody who says "I want to run Fedora without SELINUX
because I do my own security development" is by *definition*
not relevant to the whole feature.
Don't mistake the example for the feature. the SELINUX thing
is just an
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* da...@lang.hm da...@lang.hm wrote:
Anybody who says I want to run Fedora without SELINUX
because I do my own security development is by *definition*
not relevant to the whole feature.
Don't mistake the example for the feature. the SELINUX thing
is
* da...@lang.hm da...@lang.hm wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* da...@lang.hm da...@lang.hm wrote:
Anybody who says I want to run Fedora without SELINUX
because I do my own security development is by *definition*
not relevant to the whole feature.
Don't mistake the
Linus,
[sorry for the messed up threading, I could not figure out how to make
gmail use in-relp-to]
The point I'm slowly getting to is that I would actually love to have
*distro* Kconfig-files, where the distribution would be able to say
These are the minimums I *require* to work. So we'd
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 4:37 AM, Linus Torvalds
torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
In addition to the minimal distro settings, we might also have a few
common platform settings, so that you could basically do a hey, I
have a modern PC laptop, make it pick the obvious stuff that a normal
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:26 PM, wrote:
>> Some of the proposed ways to implement the minimum distro kernel would not
>> allow you to override the distro defaults because they would be implemented
>> by setting dependancies, not by
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Linus Torvalds
torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:26 PM, da...@lang.hm wrote:
Some of the proposed ways to implement the minimum distro kernel would not
allow you to override the distro defaults because they would be implemented
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:26 PM, wrote:
Some of the proposed ways to implement the minimum distro kernel would not
allow you to override the distro defaults because they would be implemented
by setting dependancies, not by selecting options that
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:26 PM, wrote:
>
> Some of the proposed ways to implement the minimum distro kernel would not
> allow you to override the distro defaults because they would be implemented
> by setting dependancies, not by selecting options that you as the user could
> then unselect.
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 9:43 AM, wrote:
The problem is that you can't select the Fedora profile and then unselect
SELINUX, so the profile will do you no good.
Guys, stop it now.
Your "problem" isn't what any sane person cares about, and isn't
Dear all,
I usually don't take part of discussions in LKML but I recognized myself
in what Linus is actually describing as a "normal user" (one of the few
insane enough to read the mailing list...) so I wrote a few ideas below...
Please give me your thoughts Benjamin
On 7/16/12 6:50 PM, "Linus
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Alan Cox wrote:
Select the profile and then fixup the config the normal way.
If what the admin wants is incompatible with the profile, admin doesn't
select the profile.
Thats ugly - "distro except..." is a standard thing you ask users to do
for debugging.
However
> Select the profile and then fixup the config the normal way.
>
> If what the admin wants is incompatible with the profile, admin doesn't
> select the profile.
Thats ugly - "distro except..." is a standard thing you ask users to do
for debugging.
However providing you separate the initial
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 9:43 AM, wrote:
>
> The problem is that you can't select the Fedora profile and then unselect
> SELINUX, so the profile will do you no good.
Guys, stop it now.
Your "problem" isn't what any sane person cares about, and isn't what
I started the RFC for.
Seriously.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 03:09:12PM -0700, da...@lang.hm wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>
> >Replying to David's message (sorry for delay) I fear having a bunch of
> >miniconfig files will end up in a mess. Maybe (maybe (!) I don't know since
> >I've no time at moment to read
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 03:09:12PM -0700, da...@lang.hm wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
Replying to David's message (sorry for delay) I fear having a bunch of
miniconfig files will end up in a mess. Maybe (maybe (!) I don't know since
I've no time at moment to read kconfig
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 9:43 AM, da...@lang.hm wrote:
The problem is that you can't select the Fedora profile and then unselect
SELINUX, so the profile will do you no good.
Guys, stop it now.
Your problem isn't what any sane person cares about, and isn't what
I started the RFC for.
Select the profile and then fixup the config the normal way.
If what the admin wants is incompatible with the profile, admin doesn't
select the profile.
Thats ugly - distro except... is a standard thing you ask users to do
for debugging.
However providing you separate the initial profile
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Alan Cox wrote:
Select the profile and then fixup the config the normal way.
If what the admin wants is incompatible with the profile, admin doesn't
select the profile.
Thats ugly - distro except... is a standard thing you ask users to do
for debugging.
However
Dear all,
I usually don't take part of discussions in LKML but I recognized myself
in what Linus is actually describing as a normal user (one of the few
insane enough to read the mailing list...) so I wrote a few ideas below...
Please give me your thoughts Benjamin
On 7/16/12 6:50 PM, Linus
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 9:43 AM, da...@lang.hm wrote:
The problem is that you can't select the Fedora profile and then unselect
SELINUX, so the profile will do you no good.
Guys, stop it now.
Your problem isn't what any sane person cares about,
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:26 PM, da...@lang.hm wrote:
Some of the proposed ways to implement the minimum distro kernel would not
allow you to override the distro defaults because they would be implemented
by setting dependancies, not by selecting options that you as the user could
then
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:26 PM, da...@lang.hm wrote:
Some of the proposed ways to implement the minimum distro kernel would not
allow you to override the distro defaults because they would be implemented
by setting dependancies, not by selecting
1 - 100 of 166 matches
Mail list logo
