Re: [PATCH v2 09/13] backports: define C code backport version info using CPTCFG_

From: Johannes Berg
Date: Wed Nov 05 2014 - 02:57:34 EST


On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 19:18 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@xxxxxxxx>
>
> In order to help unify the naming scheme for shared
> backports versioning information rely on the CPTCFG_
> prefix, when integration support gets added that will
> translate to the respective CONFIG_BACKPORT_ prefix.
> Kconfig opt env entries don't get propagated out, so
> we need to define these ourselves. This leaves all
> other names in place for packaging and just focuses
> on sharing on the C / header code.

What difference does this make? It'll break some scripting that we have
for sure (assuming the BACKPORTED_ prefix), so naturally I'd like to see
why it is necessary.

johannes

--
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/