Re: [patch 2/2] kbuild: fix crossbuild base config

[Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org>]

On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 05:56:46PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it wrote:
> 
> > This has actually created not-working UML binaries (since UML is always
> > "cross-compiled" for this purpose), as reported by Julian Scheid.
> 
> This rather suggests, there is a problem with UML. Either fix your Kconfig 
> to prevent nonvalid configurations or detect and report the problem at 
> runtime.

No, this is a damn annoying kbuild problem when cross compiling.  It's
just nice that the UML folks run into this too and found a better fix
than deleting the /boot and /lib files from the list.

> > We all agreed on this kind of general, not UML-only fix, and I (Paolo)
> > implemented it.
> 
> I don't like the two separate lists, it would be easier to just skip all 
> absolute path names.
> I would also like to avoid this patch at all. If this really should be a 
> problem, I'd consider to don't run kconfig at all in this case if there 
> is no configuration and instead suggest running defconfig (or one of 
> machine specific config targets) first.

I have a feeling that changing the behavior of 'make {,x,g,q}config' to
fail if there's no .config will upset a lot of users, possibly even more
than would be upset by never looking in /boot or /lib ever.

-- 
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/