> If we modified the config files to do what you wanted, it would spew > hundreds of warnings. If hundreds of options have been ignored, then yes - I have no problem with that (contrary to what you may be thinking). > The way the Fedora config files work is that they > are mashed together and the Kconfig files are expected filter out the ones > that do not belong to the particular arch-variant. If it spewed out > hundreds of warnings you would be sitting here complaining that it is too > noisy and you couldn't notice your config option was dropped. > How did you figure that one out exactly?! Read again what I wrote earlier - I will have no problem with 'hundreds of warnings' provided the same amount of options have been ignored and/or silently dropped - no problem at all. You are the one who assume (rather wrongly, as it turns out) that I will be moaning about these warnings. Based on what exactly is that assumption of yours? > That is the way Fedora maintainers expect it and prefer it. Well, I am not a Fedora maintainer and I do not like it, so there. As I already pointed out - if a set of options have been silently ignored I should at least be given a warning otherwise there is no way I will notice this until the kernel is built and even then I have to "swim through the sea of endless config options" in order to find out. I thought I was very clear on this. >> What happens if further down the line someone decides to place some >> more drivers in the staging area - do I have to spent another week >> to ten days posting in this mailing list to find out what is going >> on?! Wouldn't you agree that it would be much easier for people like >> myself if there was a warning in place and I knew well in advance >> what has been silently ignored, or, for whatever reason, discarded >> during the kernel build instead of 'swim through the sea of endless >> config options' as you eloquently put it? >> > > Then for god's sake just use an upstream kernel with your own personal > config options. Stop wasting our time here. > What I do and choose is my own business, besides, the last time I checked I am not holding you at gunpoint to respond to my posts with mindless ramblings, am I? >>> Let Fedora choose the rest for you. >>> >> My past experience tells me that is, most often than not, not the >> best course of action - relying on Fedora to do my job is not always >> a good idea. >> > > Then I guess we are done here. I tried to volunteer my time to help, but > now you want something that Fedora really doesn't want to support and were > provided a wiki page that explicitly said that. > If Fedora doesn't want/can't be bothered to fix something which is, and has always been, wrong, then yes - we are 'done here' indeed. _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
