On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 01:37:24PM -0000, GitLab Bridge on behalf of prarit wrote: > From: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@xxxxxxxxxx> > > The 'dist-configs' is not working properly as it only creates ELN > configs. The 'rh-configs' and 'fedora-configs' targets are not > working properly and should be creating ELN and Fedora configs but they > only create some temporary/intermediate build files. These targets > should output final .config files for each supported arch. > > There are several fixes necessary to get the *-configs targets working > properly: > > - Fix dist-configs to use a specified flavor instead of only ELN. By > default, dist-configs will build ELN configs. As is, dist-configs is actually redundant with rh/fedora-configs, and could even be removed. Well, not considering backward compatibility. When I run it here, it: - generates rhel configs - generated fedora configs (wasted (cpu) time) - process rhel configs and final files are not tagged with 'rhel'. It would be nice to have a target that generates both flavors at once. With that I can easily check how the config is on both and if the changes are getting applied correctly. But yes, I can easily script that around rh-configs/fedora-configs as well, and thus why I'm not seeing a reason for the dist-configs target, at least not as it is now. Perhaps we should hide it (from the help), as an internal target that should only be used to build the two other ones. Thoughts? rh-configs and fedora-configs are working nicely now, btw :) _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list -- kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
