Re: Linux 2.5.70 compile error

["John Stoffel" <stoffel@lucent.com>]

>>>>> "William" == William Lee Irwin <wli@holomorphy.com> writes:

William> On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 11:48:56AM -0400, John Stoffel wrote:
>> Subarchitecture Type (PC-compatible, Voyager (NCR), NUMAQ (IBM/Sequent), Summit/EXA (IBM x440), Support for other sub-arch SMP systems with more than 8 CPUs, SGI 320/540 (Visual Workstation), Generic architecture (Summit, bigsmp, default)) [PC-compatible] (NEW) 
>> What the hell am I supposed to enter here?  This is just friggin ugly
>> and un-readable.  It should be cleaned up.  Or is it just that the
>> help entry is appended to the question improperly here?  That's sorta
>> what it looks like peering at it with my head turned to the left all
>> the way.

William> If you don't know, then just hit "enter".

Sure, I understand that, but what I'm really complaining about is the
text of the prompt.  When I do a 'make menuconfig' it's alot cleaner
and more understandable what's happening here.

Part of the problem is the specification in arch/i386/Kconfig, which I
think needs to be re-worked.  

In my case, I specified that the max number of CPUS is 2, since I only
have a dual CPU box.  So it's not a BIGCPU box.  Not sure how to make
this change... I'll have to find some time and play with this.

William> Yes, they're mutually exclusive. You can't build one that
William> will run on all those machines because the programming isn't
William> done right for that.  But the generic architecture option
William> will run on at least 3.

I see that when I dod the menuconfig, it's not clear at all when
running oldconfig.

John