Re: [PATCH] kbuild: Allow to combine multiple W= levels

[boris@alien8.de]

I'm really getting tired of this!

> Because you are not even sure of what you submitted is good for the kernel
> ?

No, because we need to get a feeling of what makes sense for all these
options first. I'd rather do the learning-by-doing thing here and
implement what makes sense than braindead frameworks.

> I think this has been done completely wrong, first all the extra
> warnings got in (without a detailed impact implied by each one),

WTF? http://marc.info/?l=linux-kbuild&m=130346037604547&w=2

No one else did check those and said, ACK/NACK so we went in with this
initial splitting first.

> then it was decided to be split in several level (which I proposed on
> Feb 20th, but was originally rejected by Borislav Petkov),

Of course, because it made no sense at the time. Sam added it later with
his proposal patch.

> then, well, some may need to be removed because they are not good for
> Linux.

have you even tried all those options and come up with concrete
suggestions on which options should go in and which shouldn't, and for
what reasons? I don't think so. So until you do, I don't care what you
have to say.

[snip a bunch of bullshit]

> Now, the drawback of your comment is that when it will be time to
> change the interface, some will object because it will have been
> started to be used by third party scripts, and as authors of third
> party script, it is a PITA to have to check the kernel version to know
> if I should W=1,2,3, or W=123 or if W=3 includes W=1 ...

This is exactly why we're trying to get a feeling of this by _running_
it and _then_ _bitching_ about it. And this is for DEVELOPERS only - if
they've introduced it in their scripts, then they should be able to fix
any changes very easily.