Hi,
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Ben Hutchings <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 17:47 +0100, Michal Marek wrote:
>> On 5.12.2010 07:35, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
>> > note: I would not mind adding the KCONFIG_VERBOSE logic.
>> >
>> > Original idea and implementation by Bastian Blank <waldi@xxxxxxxxxx>,
>> > Maximilian Attems <max@xxxxxxx> and Ben Hutchings <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >
>> > CC: Ben Hutchings <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > Signed-off-by: Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> > scripts/kconfig/conf.c | 14 +++++++++++++-
>> > scripts/kconfig/confdata.c | 4 ++--
>> > 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/scripts/kconfig/conf.c b/scripts/kconfig/conf.c
>> > index 5459a38..1b58129 100644
>> > --- a/scripts/kconfig/conf.c
>> > +++ b/scripts/kconfig/conf.c
>> > @@ -411,6 +411,17 @@ conf_childs:
>> > indent -= 2;
>> > }
>> >
>> > +
>> > +static void
>> > +listnewconfig_print_symbol(FILE *fp, struct symbol *sym, const char *val, void *arg)
>> > +{
>> > + fprintf(fp, "%s%s (default: %s)\n", CONFIG_, sym->name, val);
>> > +}
>>
>> Ben, do you have an opinion on this format versus the standard .config
>> produced by your patch?
> [...]
>
> The .config format is more useful as it is then possible to copy lines
> directly into a .config file. If you're going to apply Arnaud's
> preceding patch (1/2) then please let me rewrite mine to apply on top of
> that, rather than applying this second patch.
>
I'm fine if you do so, I do not really care about any specific
formatting. However, I'd like to avoid the SYMBOL_NEW part, which is
broken and not needed.
I did not had the time to address Michal's comment on [1/2] this
evening because of some rush @WORK, hope to do that tomorrow :/.
- 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
