Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 20 Jul 2007 18:28:25 +0200 | From | Stefan Richter <> | Subject | Re: [RFC 1/4] CONFIG_STABLE: Define it |
| |
(I missed the original post, hence am replying to te reply...) > On 5/31/07, clameter@sgi.com <clameter@sgi.com> wrote: >> Introduce CONFIG_STABLE to control checks only useful for development. >> >> Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> >> [...] >> 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. >> +
Didn't we talk about the wording and the logic some time ago? Your option looks like a magic switch that suddenly improves kernel stability, hence everyone will switch it on.
How about this:
config BUILD_FOR_RELEASE bool "Build for release" help If the kernel is configured as a release build, various checks that are only of interest to kernel development will be omitted.
If unsure, say Y.
Or this:
config BUILD_FOR_TESTING bool "Build for testing" help If the kernel is configured as a test build, various checks useful for testing of pre-releases will be activated.
If unsure, say N. -- Stefan Richter -=====-=-=== -=== =-=-- http://arcgraph.de/sr/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |