Re: Announcing CML2, a replacement for the kbuild system

From: Jesse Pollard (
Date: Thu May 25 2000 - 10:16:33 EST

"Eric S. Raymond" <>:
> Alexander Viro <>:
> > > Even if this weren't true, we'd be trading dependencies and not adding
> > > one. The Perl stuff in the scripts directory will go away shortly
> > > (that is, assuming that Linus approves the CML1->CML2 change). This
> > > would be a net gain in kernel autonomy, as Perl *can't* be compiled away.
> >
> > Yeah, but you don't have to use these Perl scripts to configure and build
> > a fresh tree - they are debugging/sanity checking tools. Heck, there is
> > some Tk stuff in the tree - it doesn't mean an absolute dependency on the
> > bloody mess...
> Still, the Python stuff can be frozen to straight C, eliminating the
> dependency. I'll test and supply the machinery for this as soon as I
> see an actual (as opposed to theoretical, it-would-be-nice-if)
> requirement. In the meantime, I have a Tk front end to write.
> (Ideally, I'd like to turf both Perl and Tk out of the kernel tree
> entirely. They're kludges, and they promote kludging. Python plus
> a GTK++ binding could make Tk unnecessary. Would GTK++ be a greater
> or lesser requirement than Tk?)

Equivalent. As long as the new configuration tool can itself be configured
to omit X and dependancies on X during the build, I don't see a problem.

Right now, I have a firewall/router/.... (multiple functions for the time
being) that I configure via SSH. Right now, the X libraries (none of them)
are available. X is not available. I may add libX, and libXaw so that I
can run an xterm over SSH. There won't be any development libraries beyond
the minimum for a kernel compile.

I could compile the kernel on my PPro, but that then assumes enough
separation from the PPro development and kernel distribution that the
resulting kernel is valid for the 486, and doesn't disturb the PPro. It
also means that I have to complete the kernel install (and modules) separately
when I take the distribution back to the 486. (I know, I know - the 486 system
could be build using a chroot environment... but what a pain.)

I just find it simpler to keep the 486 kernel configure/build on the 486; and
the PPro on the PPro.

As long as it will still work with a minimum development environment (no
TCL, TK, perl, or X). I still have to think whether I put lex/yacc on the 486,
I just don't remember...

Jesse I Pollard, II

Any opinions expressed are solely my own.

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 - 21:00:14 EST