From: Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: torvalds@transmeta.com
Subject: kbuild 2.5 is ready for inclusion in the 2.5 kernel - take 3
Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 08:42:18 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3038.1021588938@ocs3.intra.ocs.com.au> (raw)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Third and final attempt. Original sent on May 2, second mail sent on
May 14, still no response from Linus.
Linus, kbuild 2.5 is ready for inclusion in the main 2.5 kernel tree.
It is faster, better documented, easier to write build rules in, has
better install facilities, allows separate source and object trees, can
do concurrent builds from the same source tree and is significantly
more accurate than the existing kernel build system.
The current state is
kbuild-2.5-core-14 Fits any 2.4 and 2.5 kernel.
kbuild-2.5-common-2.5.15-4 2.5.15 arch independent files.
There are several arch dependent files for 2.5.15 or earlier kernels.
kbuild-2.5-i386-2.5.15-2
kbuild-2.5-sparc64-2.5.15-1
kbuild-2.5-s390-2.5.15-1
kbuild-2.5-s390x-2.5.15-1
kbuild-2.5-ppc-2.5.14-1
kbuild-2.5-sh-2.5.12-1 (also fits 2.5.13)
kbuild-2.5-ia64-2.5.10-020426-1 (last Mosberger patch)
That covers most of the architectures that currently build on 2.5.
This version has only been tested on CML1. kbuild 2.5 has support for
an older version of CML2 but it has not been tested on newer versions
of CML2.
Before I send you the kbuild 2.5 patch, how do you want to handle it?
* Coexist with the existing kernel build for one or two releases or
delete the old build system when kbuild 2.5 goes in?
Coexistence for a few days gives a backout, just in case. It also
gives a kernel release where the old and new code can be compared,
useful for architectures that have not been converted yet.
Deleting the old system at the same time means that unconverted
architectures cannot build. OTOH many architectures are already
broken in the 2.5 kernel.
* I need a quiet period of 24-48 hours (no changes at all) after a new
kernel release to bring kbuild 2.5 up to the latest release, before
sending you the complete patch. Which kernel release do you want
kbuild 2.5 against?
I would like kbuild 2.5 to go in in the near future. Keeping up to
date with kernel changes is a significant effort, Makefiles change all
the time, especially when major subsystems like sound and usb are
reorganised. There are also some changes to architecture code to do it
right under kbuild 2.5 and tracking those against kernel changes can be
painful.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999
iD8DBQE85DXKi4UHNye0ZOoRAsRyAJwP52HqsmJhZKNIiJKQUScLjD/cOgCffzTc
Uj1qHkvIszUfOYQtInekCYY=
=sxcO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
next reply other threads:[~2002-05-16 22:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-05-16 22:42 Keith Owens [this message]
2002-05-17 0:10 ` Nicolas Pitre
2002-05-17 3:30 ` Tomas Szepe
2002-05-17 7:55 ` Russell King
2002-05-17 8:42 ` Miles Lane
2002-05-17 13:11 ` Dave Jones
2002-05-17 13:09 ` Denis Vlasenko
2002-05-17 8:17 ` Tomas Szepe
2002-05-17 13:39 ` Denis Vlasenko
2002-05-17 1:50 ` jeff millar
2002-05-17 2:04 ` Keith Owens
2002-05-17 2:26 ` Dave Jones
2002-05-17 7:11 ` Kenneth Johansson
2002-05-17 15:13 ` Nicolas Pitre
2002-05-17 15:19 ` Tomas Szepe
2002-05-17 15:42 ` Nicolas Pitre
2002-05-18 1:39 ` Keith Owens
2002-05-18 2:11 ` Nicolas Pitre
2002-05-18 2:19 ` Keith Owens
2002-05-18 22:14 ` Drivers.conf and kbuild-2.5 [Was: kbuild 2.5 is ready ...] Sam Ravnborg
2002-05-18 22:35 ` Dave Jones
2002-05-19 10:45 ` Sam Ravnborg
2002-05-17 18:19 ` kbuild 2.5 is ready for inclusion in the 2.5 kernel - take 3 Diego Calleja
2002-05-19 15:46 ` Pavel Machek
2002-05-17 14:21 Wayne.Brown
2002-05-17 17:37 ` Adam Kropelin
2002-05-17 18:00 ` Robert Love
2002-05-17 14:56 James Bottomley
2002-05-17 19:51 Wayne.Brown
2002-05-17 20:09 ` Dave Jones
2002-05-17 20:25 ` Diego Calleja
2002-05-18 13:15 ` Paul P Komkoff Jr
2002-05-17 20:53 Wayne.Brown
2002-05-17 21:14 ` Andrew Morton
2002-05-17 21:42 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-05-17 22:16 ` Kai Germaschewski
2002-05-17 22:34 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-05-17 22:40 ` Larry McVoy
2002-05-18 0:41 ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-05-17 22:09 ` Nicolas Pitre
2002-05-18 0:38 ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-05-17 22:59 Wayne.Brown
2002-05-17 23:14 ` Robert Love
2002-05-18 4:01 ` Horst von Brand
2002-05-18 12:57 ` Diego Calleja
2002-05-18 5:09 Wayne.Brown
2002-05-18 5:23 ` David Lang
2002-05-18 13:11 ` Diego Calleja
2002-05-18 6:05 Wayne.Brown
2002-05-18 16:50 ` John Weber
2002-05-18 10:25 Mike Galbraith
2002-05-18 17:32 ` Wayne.Brown
2002-05-18 18:11 ` Tomas Szepe
2002-05-18 21:15 ` DervishD
2002-05-20 4:31 ` Mike Fedyk
2002-05-20 5:09 ` Albert D. Cahalan
2002-05-20 5:18 ` Keith Owens
2002-05-20 14:29 ` Juan Quintela
2002-05-20 5:11 ` Keith Owens
2002-05-19 10:26 Mike Galbraith
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3038.1021588938@ocs3.intra.ocs.com.au \
--to=kaos@ocs.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®