Hi,
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 1:30 PM, Ben Hutchings <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-12-04 at 13:11 -0500, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
> [...]
>> > +static void report_conf(struct menu *menu, bool verbose)
>> > +{
>> > + struct symbol *sym;
>> > + struct menu *child;
>> > +
>> > + if (!menu_is_visible(menu))
>> > + return;
>> > +
>> > + if (verbose && menu == &rootmenu) {
>> > + printf("\n#\n"
>> > + "# Changes:\n"
>> > + "#\n");
>> > + }
>> > +
FWIW, some more nits about this header:
- I'd rather either always or never see it, not depending on whether
or not KBUILD_VERBOSE is set to non-zero.
- The "menu == &rootmenu" test is pretty useless, just move the
display (if any) outside of report_conf(), where there is no
ambiguity.
- And why do you need a leading newline in front of the header (ie.
the "\n#\n") ? The only places where this construct is used in conf is
when there is a need to highlight the message, which should not be
needed here.
>> I would not expect to see any header if there is no new symbol(s).
>> However, that might complicate the code too much. Btw, I find
>> "Changes" to be misleading, is that header necessary ?
>
> We use this feature (or an earlier version of it) in automated kernel
> builds in Debian, so we expect the output to appear in build logs and
> the header makes it easier to pick out.
>
That's easily doable outside kconfig.
- Arnaud
--
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
