From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net>
To: Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: If you want kbuild 2.5, tell Linus
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002 16:54:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E17EtEH-0000vY-00@starship> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3434.1023112731@ocs3.intra.ocs.com.au>
On Monday 03 June 2002 15:58, Keith Owens wrote:
> Q07. Why is [b]zImage part of the config?
> A07. In the current system, installation is a poor relation of the
> build system. Each architecture has their own install targets
> with their own special rules. None of the install targets check
> that what is being installed was built correctly.
>
> In kbuild 2.5 the install target is a fully supported part of the
> build. Not only is [b]zImage (and all the other targets) part of
> the config, the config also supports installation to somewhere
> other than /, plus optional rules for installing the config and
> System.map at the same time as the kernel and modules. This
> significantly improves support for cross compilation.
>
> A nice side effect of putting all the install information in
> .config is that building a new kernel is as simple as
>
> cp previous_config .config
> make ... defconfig installable && sudo make install
That simplification is appreciated, but I think that
make -f Makefile-2.5 bzImage
should still be allowed, call it compatibility glue if you like.
For what it's worth, I find it quite natural to have the build
information in the .config and I was able to find my way to it
without reading the docs. Still - when Makefile-2.5 becomes just
plain Makefile, a lot of fingers are still going to want to type
"make bzImage".
--
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-06-03 14:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-06-03 13:58 Keith Owens
2002-06-03 13:20 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-06-03 14:36 ` Tomas Szepe
2002-06-03 14:15 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-06-03 17:51 ` Austin Gonyou
2002-06-03 22:10 ` Diego Calleja
2002-06-03 22:24 ` John Alvord
2002-06-03 22:34 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-06-03 23:10 ` Diego Calleja
2002-06-04 1:26 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-06-06 19:31 ` Kai Henningsen
2002-06-06 20:56 ` Tom Rini
2002-06-07 0:30 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-06-07 15:29 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-06-03 14:33 ` Nicolas Pitre
2002-06-03 15:27 ` Peter Wächtler
2002-06-03 16:09 ` Nicolas Pitre
2002-06-03 14:54 ` Daniel Phillips [this message]
2002-06-03 17:26 ` Olivier Galibert
2002-06-03 15:29 Wayne.Brown
2002-06-03 16:05 ` Mark Mielke
2002-06-03 17:24 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-06-03 17:33 Martin.Knoblauch
2002-06-03 17:48 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-06-04 7:04 Martin.Knoblauch
2002-06-06 21:01 Jesse Pollard
2002-06-06 21:36 ` Tomas Szepe
2002-06-10 21:43 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-06-07 1:39 ` Mark Mielke
2002-06-07 15:31 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-06-08 15:51 ` David Woodhouse
2002-06-08 15:54 ` Thunder from the hill
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=E17EtEH-0000vY-00@starship \
--to=phillips@bonn-fries.net \
--cc=kaos@ocs.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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®