Re: 2.6.22.7 autoconf.h is screwed up

["Jaswinder Singh" <jaswinderlinux@gmail.com>]

hello rday,

On 9/24/07, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@mindspring.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Jaswinder Singh wrote:
>
> > hello rday,
> >
> > On 9/24/07, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Jaswinder Singh wrote:
> > >
> > > > hello rday,
> > > >
> > > > In my view autoconf.h is the index of kernel you are using. By
> > > > reading autoconf.h you will know what Architecture, drivers is
> > > > selected.
> > > >
> > > > For example, If we are using some ARM based board, If you give me
> > > > your autoconf.h , I can replicate same environment as yours. If it
> > > > is not properly formatted it is very difficult to read and come to
> > > > some conclusion.
> > >
> > > no, the proper thing to do is give someone your .config file if you
> > > want them to reproduce your configuration, and leave autoconf.h out of
> > > it.
> > >
> >
> > yes, you are right. So autoconf.h is obsolete and replaced by .config
> > . And now autoconf.h looks so funny and scary that no body dares to
> > open autoconf.h in future ;-)
>
> no, you're missing the point.  the .config file represents your
> selection of kernel options, it's what you can hand to someone if they
> want to reproduce your configuration.  autoconf.h, on the other hand,
> is automatically generated from your .config file once you start the
> build process.  it is in no way "obsolete", it's used by the build
> process -- it's just not meant to be manipulated by users.
>
> don't worry about autoconf.h, just leave it alone -- the build process
> takes care of it.
>

So it is obsolete for user's point of view, right ?

That's why it is written in such a way that no human can read it (Not
human readable). right ?

Thank you,

Jaswinder Singh.