Re: kvmtool tree (Was: Re: [patch] config: fix make kvmconfig)
From: David Woodhouse
Date: Mon Feb 11 2013 - 08:18:29 EST
On Mon, 2013-02-11 at 13:56 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> To use another, perhaps more applicable analogy:
> If one has the choice to start a new business in the U.S., it
> would be reasonable to do that. There's a lot of supporting
> infrastructure, trust, distribution, standards, enforcement
> agencies and available workers.
> Could the same business succeed in Somalia as well? Possibly -
> if it's a bakery or something similarly fundamental. More
> complex businesses would likely not thrive very well there.
> *That* is how I think the current Linux kernel tooling landscape
> looks like currently in a fair number of places: in many aspects
> it's similar to Somalia - disjunct entities with not much
> commonality or shared infrastructure.
That's complete nonsense. If you want to use pieces of the kernel
infrastructure, then just *take* them. There are loads of projects which
use the kernel config tools, for example. There's no need to be *in* the
And for code-reuse it's even easy enough to automatically extract parts
of kernel code into a separate repository. See the ecos-jffs2 and
linux-headers trees, for example, which automatically tracked Linus'
tree with a certain transformation to make them sane for just pulling
into the relevant target repositories.
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature