On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 03:50:52PM -0400, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 09:34:55PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > If you have a simple command that give you a list of new > > symbols then this is easy to script as Michal also > > shows with the below example. > > > > > > How about > > > > new=$(make listnewconfig) > > > > if test -n "$new"; then > > > > echo "Please set the following options:" >&2 > > > > echo "$new" >&2 > > > > exit 1 > > > > fi > > > > ? Wouldn't that be the same as nonint_oldconfig before? > > > what's the other use cases for listnewconfig (other than a incomplete > > > nonint_oldconfig)? > > > > listnewconfig is for everyone that like to see a list of new > > config options - without touching the current configuration. > > > > By limiting listnewconfig to do only one thing you actually > > create further uses than before. First off let me correct myself. nonint_oldconfig does the following: - print any new options to stderr - if tere are any new options exit with exit code 2 - it does _not_ touch the current configuration (as I wrongly implied above) listnewconfig does the following: - print any new options to stdout - return with exit code 0 (success) - it does not touch the current configuration So the change we discuss is only the exit code. You indicated you were OK with the name change, and I assume the change from stderr => stdout is OK too. > > > > This is not about how well it applies to the tailored > > use in redhat's current scripts. > *sigh* I think we have people able to handle such complex changes. > > this is not what it's about. I don't care how it's called or if scripts > will need to be changed. What I want to know is if either: > a) we're reducing functionality of something in order to support more *real* > use cases with the same code, making it more generic; > or > b) we're reducing functionality based in theorical use cases. > > if it's (a), you get my ACK I can try to come up with some use cases that I consider real... a) List the number of new options after I upgraded my kernel. It can be used to judge the amount of time used to answer oldconfig manually. If make tells me that conf had an exit code != success how do I then know the list is complete? b) List the number of new options when I bring in an old config. Same comment as in a) about the exit code. c) List the options I need to carefully lookup to judge what to do about them. A variant of a) and b) - the one I expect all distributions uses in some way. [scripts/diffconfig is one way] d) We can use listnewconfig in scripts without failing due to conf exit with an error code when there are new options. And use of stdout is thus more convinient. [And I know the counter argument is that with the exit code it is easy to judge if there is any new options]. I hope this shows enough examples that you consider in the _real_ category that you can give it your ack. Sam -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
