On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 10:31:38AM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > I don't know exactly how defconfigs are handled, but I can imagine that > the responsible developer is running "make oldconfig" on the system in > question from times to times and copying the result back to the > defconfig file. The purpose of updating defconfig files is to make > configuration option renames transparent. The big problem is that everyone 'make oldconfig' is done, the entire config file essentially gets re-sorted into some other random order, and the changes are massive. If a platform maintainer does this, and the result is committed, and some other person has done some small sed-based updates to the defconfigs, the result is _total_ chaos. That's why I'm arguing for my approach. That way, platform maintainers stand a better chance of seeing what happens to their defconfig files and there's a substantially better chance of some coordination of those changes (that is if the arch maintainer is doing their job properly.) -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
