From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <465E8D4C.9040506@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 10:54:36 +0200 From: Stefan Richter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC 1/4] CONFIG_STABLE: Define it References: <20070531002047.702473071@sgi.com> <20070531003012.302019683@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20070531003012.302019683@sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: clameter@sgi.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org List-ID: > --- slub.orig/init/Kconfig 2007-05-30 16:35:05.000000000 -0700 > +++ slub/init/Kconfig 2007-05-30 16:35:45.000000000 -0700 > @@ -65,6 +65,13 @@ endmenu > > menu "General setup" > > +config STABLE > + bool "Stable kernel" > + help > + If the kernel is configured to be a stable kernel then various > + checks that are only of interest to kernel development will be > + omitted. > + > config LOCALVERSION > string "Local version - append to kernel release" > help a) Why in Kconfig, why not in Makefile? b) Of course nobody wants STABLE=n. :-) How about: config RELEASE bool "Build for release" help If the kernel is declared as a release build here, then various checks that are only of interest to kernel development will be omitted. c) A drawback of this general option is, it's hard to tell what will be omitted in particular. -- Stefan Richter -=====-=-=== -=-= ===== http://arcgraph.de/sr/ -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org