On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 12:14:32PM -0500, Bill Gatliff wrote: > Paul Mundt wrote: > > > Yes, that's the easy case. It's things like perl that are the corner > > cases, and my objection comes from the fact that people think we ought to > > not have the kernel depend on perl rather than just fixing the package > > itself. Autoconf/libtool damage is an entirely different problem :-) > > > > At first glance, it seems like checkincludes.pl could be duplicated by egrep | > uniq | wc vs. egrep | wc. Not quite sure what checkversion.pl is trying to do. > > The namespace.pl script looks optional, as does export_report.pl. > > So maybe we could _reduce_ dependency on perl, if there's any advantage to gain > by doing so. But the kernel build machinery isn't dependent on very many other > systems (just tcl, bash and gcc-core), so I don't really see the point unless > you could completely eliminate perl. And I don't see how you might do *that* > without dragging in a bunch of stuff to replace it, thereby increasing the > number of dependencies. All the noise about the perl dependency of the kernel build are rooted in two things: 1) That we now have a mandatory part of the build that uses perl (see kernel/Makefile) 2) That I told that I consider rewriting the core of the build system in perl As for 1) I have seen a patch submitted once. And I do not hear many complaint either, albeit Rob Landley is a bit loud here (and he was also the one submitting the patch). That patch was not acceptable as is - and noone has updated it. As for 2) then let see if that ever happens ;-) Sam -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
