Re: State of the new config & build system

Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo (acme@conectiva.com.br)
Sat, 29 Dec 2001 02:52:29 -0200


Em Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 03:44:10PM +1100, Keith Owens escreveu:
> On Fri, 28 Dec 2001 20:21:39 -0800,
> Mike Castle <dalgoda@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >On Fri, Dec 28, 2001 at 10:58:03PM -0500, Legacy Fishtank wrote:
> >> s/break/update dependencies/
> >>
> >> I assumed this was blindingly obvious, but I guess not.
> >
> >To YOU and other kernel hackers, yes.
> >
> >But not to everyone.
> >
> >Plus, as I understand it, it will be faster to:
> >
> >apply a patch and rebuild with kbuild 2.5
> >
> >than to:
> >
> >apply a patch, make dep && make bzImage.
> >
> >Correct?
>
> As long as the patch does not change an include file that is used a
> lot, yes, a patch and make will be significantly faster using kbuild

And thats something I encourage people to work on: to reduce the includes
dependencies hell, I hope to have the cleanup I did to include/net/sock.h
removing the protocol specific headers from there and the cleanup that
Daniel Phillips is doing in include/net/fs.h in the tree soon, of course if
there's not issues, that we're very interesting to know.

- Arnaldo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/