Re: [RFC 1/4] CONFIG_STABLE: Define it

[Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>]

> --- 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 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/