Re: [KBUILD] Re: Announcing CML2, a replacement for the kbuild system

From: Austin Schutz (
Date: Wed May 24 2000 - 19:24:15 EST

> For the record (as I've told Eric before), I don't think is
> any substitute for usable source code. If it is determined that Python
> is an absolutely onerous requirement and that the system must build
> with gcc only, it's not reasonable to expect Linus to run `freeze'
> every time someone patches the Python source.

        Is maintaining a bunch of broken tcl any better? Why would it
be hard for Linus to run freeze, particularly if it were part of a Makefile?
Requiring everyone to have python is not reasonable, requiring Linus
to have python probably _is_ reasonable. Why is patching python code any
harder than patching C?

> Nor is it practical to
> require every CML2 patch submitter to include the patch to frozen C.

        This is certainly impractical, but no one is suggesting it.

> So I think "there is a available" is something of a red
> herring. Either we accept Python as a build requirement or we don't.
> (And if not, Eric or someone like him can go rewrite it all in C or
> *gasp* Perl.)
        I disagree. Neither I nor most people will have interest in monkeying
with that portion of the code. If we do, then OK, we get python. Don't we have
to have tcl to monkey with the Tk source now?

> > I don't run X, think it's evil as hell, and love my
> > faster-than-a-bat-out-of-hell curses stuff, and would hate to have to
> > butcher the hell out of this stuff so that it doesn't look for the X
> > libraries at startup...

        Perhaps a little discussion on the default behavior would be in order.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 31 2000 - 21:00:13 EST