Re: bug in 2.3.18ac9 net/Config.in
Thomas Molina (tmolina@home.com)
Tue, 28 Sep 1999 09:04:58 -0500 (CDT)
On 28 Sep 1999, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> I don't actually disagree that this specific case is a bug in the
> Config.in file, however it annoys me to see over and over again how
> the Config.in files are changed to get around stupidities in the menu
> based config tools.
>
> Michael> So I think the real question is "how come Menuconfig doesn't
> Michael> print out informative syntax errors?" Because if it did,
> Michael> then the people who write Config.in scripts with syntax
> Michael> errors would get error reports before submitting their
> Michael> patches to Alan or Linus.
>
> Except that it requires that the people who write the patches actually
> use these tools. There is no way I am going to waste time running
> menuconfig/xconfig before shipping something.
You seem to be saying you're going to make changes which work with
config, and you don't care if they break menuconfig/xconfig? You're not
even going to test the changes? That seems akin to someone saying they
want to make changes which optomize running on an Alpha. Furthermore,
they don't care if it breaks x86 because that is a stupid architecture.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/