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

From: Alexander Viro (
Date: Fri May 26 2000 - 20:27:06 EST

On Fri, 26 May 2000, Eric S. Raymond wrote:

> One of the purposes of making the CML2 language declarative rather than
> imperative is to make all the dependencies explicit, rather than implied
> by control structure as in CML1. Because that's so, over time it will
> be possible to improve the deductive algoritms in the front end without
> having to endure another replacement of the language.

Sigh... I suspect that it's the real reason why your approach doesn't make
sense to me - you are developing complex stuff that works for FUBAR domain
instead of getting the domain fixed.

Try to grep the tree for CONFIG_FOO - you'll see that most of the places
that care are in Makefiles. 99% of the rest is not needed - check the
history of fs/filesystems.c for example.

IOW, instead of developing clever ways to handle complex dependencies
we'ld be better off simplifying them and leaving the rest to make(1)...

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 - 21:00:16 EST