From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268295AbUHXUpt (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:45:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268300AbUHXUps (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:45:48 -0400 Received: from pfepa.post.tele.dk ([195.41.46.235]:25693 "EHLO pfepa.post.tele.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268295AbUHXUpf (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:45:35 -0400 Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 22:46:11 +0200 From: Sam Ravnborg To: Jesper Juhl Cc: Sam Ravnborg , Mikael Pettersson , LKML Subject: Re: Shouldn't kconfig defaults match recommendations in help text? Message-ID: <20040824204611.GB26136@mars.ravnborg.org> Mail-Followup-To: Jesper Juhl , Sam Ravnborg , Mikael Pettersson , LKML References: <16683.22576.781038.756277@alkaid.it.uu.se> <20040824182930.GA7260@mars.ravnborg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 09:33:09PM +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote: > > Which brings me to another thing regarding configs and defaults - there > does not seem to be much relation between the defaults in the various > Kconfig files and the settings in arch//defconfig which puzzles me, > especially since "make defconfig" seems to use the stuff from > arch//defconfig and not what's specified in Kconfig... > Wouldn't it make sense to update the defconfig's to match the Kconfig's > when I make these changes? defconfig is only subject for changes by arch-maintainers. And defaults provided in Kconfig is mainly valid for i386 anyway - so are the Kconfig help text. Sam