[Devel] [PATCH 1/6] BC: kconfig

[Matt Helsley]

On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 15:32 -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 15:13:42 -0700 Matt Helsley wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 15:04 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 15:01 +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote:
> > > > --- ./arch/sparc64/Kconfig.arkcfg	2006-07-17 17:01:11.000000000 +0400
> > > > +++ ./arch/sparc64/Kconfig	2006-08-10 17:56:36.000000000 +0400
> > > > @@ -432,3 +432,5 @@ source "security/Kconfig"
> > > >  source "crypto/Kconfig"
> > > >  
> > > >  source "lib/Kconfig"
> > > > +
> > > > +source "kernel/bc/Kconfig"
> > > ...
> > > > --- ./arch/sparc64/Kconfig.arkcfg	2006-07-17 17:01:11.000000000 +0400
> > > > +++ ./arch/sparc64/Kconfig	2006-08-10 17:56:36.000000000 +0400
> > > > @@ -432,3 +432,5 @@ source "security/Kconfig"
> > > >  source "crypto/Kconfig"
> > > >  
> > > >  source "lib/Kconfig"
> > > > +
> > > > +source "kernel/bc/Kconfig"
> > > 
> > > Is it just me, or do these patches look a little funky?  Looks like it
> > > is trying to patch the same thing into the same file, twice.  Also, the
> > > patches look to be -p0 instead of -p1.  
> > 
> > They do appear to be -p0
> > 
> > 	They aren't adding the same thing twice to the same file. This patch
> > makes different arches source the same Kconfig.
> 
> Look again.  There are 2 diffstat blocks and 2 of these at least:
> 
> --- ./kernel/bc/Kconfig.bckm	2006-07-28 13:07:38.000000000 +0400
> +++ ./kernel/bc/Kconfig	2006-07-28 13:09:51.000000000 +0400
> @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
> 
> 
> > 	I seem to recall Chandra suggested that instead of doing it this way it
> > would be more appropriate to add the source line to init/Kconfig because
> > it's more central and arch-independent. I tend to agree.
> 
> ---
> ~Randy

My mistake, Dave is right.

Cheers,
	-Matt Helsley