nanogui: Microwindows cleanups .... some ideas
Subject:
Re: [nanogui] Re: Microwindows cleanups .... some ideas
From:
Jachym Holecek ####@####.####
Date:
27 Apr 2005 01:49:24 +0100
Message-Id: <20050427004912.GA29128@merlot.ics.muni.cz>
Hello,
> > eh ?? KDE don't have anything to do here ..... as far as I know the
> > linux kernel doesn't need KDE to compile :D I don't really know what
> > makes you think that KDE is needed, but if it is related to 'make
> > .*config', this is not an issue. You can take a look at busybox or
> > uclibc as an example.
>
> one of the top hits on google for kconfig:
>
> http://developer.kde.org/documentation/tutorials/kconfigxt/kconfigxt.html
Nope, the-kconfig-Alain-talks-about is not a separate project on its
own (AFAIK), but it's included by several other projects.
> I'm just a confused non-linux user.
>
> what would "kconfig" do?
A tool that takes a set of description files ("features + options +
depends"), lets you make choices ("want feature X, option Y") either
in a primitive single-line (imagine sh(1)'s read function to get the
feeling) interface, or in a sweet'n'l33t curses one (and there's an
X11 interface too, I think). As a result, it saves a file containing
"WANT_FOO=y" statements. The produced file can be later read back
and edited with the same interface. It's supposed to be included
by a Makefile -- usually (?) this is done with construct like
.include ".config"
...
objs-${WANT_FOO} += fubar.o
...
main-whatever: ${objs-y}
${DO_IT_ALL}
Kconfig is used by a couple of projects as a configuration wheel, its
origin is in Linux kernel's build system.
As I said in a recent thread, I'd prefer the build system as it stands
now (simple + works fine + predictable + easy-to-fix-and-extend),
as opposed to fixing-what-ain't-broken (I don't really understand
the motivation for a move towards Kconfig) with a tool that I think
could use more refinement...
Not that my opinion really matters / Just my two cents / etc ;-)
Regards,
-- Jachym Holecek
