Re: [RFC 1/4] CONFIG_STABLE: Define it

[David Miller]

From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 10:54:36 +0200

> b) Of course nobody wants STABLE=n. :-)  How about:
> 
> config RELEASE
> 	bool "Build for release"
> 	help
> 	  If the kernel is declared as a release build here, then
> 	  various checks that are only of interest to kernel development
> 	  will be omitted.

Agreed :-)

> 
> c) A drawback of this general option is, it's hard to tell what will be
>    omitted in particular.

In that sense it is similar to EMBEDDED, but I still think there
is high value to this, I can already think of several things I
want to put under this which are only noise I want to see during
development periods.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/