[gentoo-dev] linux-info.eclass and $CONFIG_CHECK

[Georgi Georgiev]

The linux-info.eclass is used by a few packages to check for appropriate
kernel configuration options.

Now, packages that install kernel modules, i.e. packages that inherit
linux-mod.eclass are right to check for those options in pkg_setup and
abort unless these are available. After all, these packages are most
often unable to even compile properly without them and they merge
against a particular kernel version. They also require a remerge when
the kernel is changed -- all reasonable.

However, I have a problem with these checks in packages that inherit
linux-info.eclass. With net-dialup/ppp in particular, though there are
others -- cpufreqd for example. So, "emerge ppp" checks if I have
CONFIG_PPP and dies unless this is the case (fact is, the eclass dies
after being unable to find the kernel sources). Naturally the quesiton
WHY comes.  ppp does not require recompilation when the kernel changes.
And in my particular case, where I am building binary packages in a
chroot on a completely different machine this check is absolutely
unnecessary.  In fact, I have nothing in "world" in that chroot that has
a dependency on the kernel sources.

And last, if all packages that inherit linux-info are going to die with

 * Determining the location of the kernel source code
 * Unable to find kernel sources at /usr/src/linux
 * This package requires Linux sources.
 * Please make sure that /usr/src/linux points at your running kernel, 
 * (or the kernel you wish to build against).
 * Alternatively, set the KERNEL_DIR environment variable to the kernel sources location

then the least they can do is depend on virutal/linux-sources so I can
see it coming ahead of time. Of course, I'd then bitch about packages
having an unnecessary dependency on the sources, as they do in fact
compile and merge just fine.

( Shouldn't the BSD teams also care about this? As it is, portage cannot
merge ppp on a *BSD, even though it appears to be supported by the
package itself (well, it needs to patch the BSD kernel, so I guess
nobody would ever try to do it... not a good argument). )

I can only think of a couple of solution:

- Remove these unnecessary checks completely: Follow the example of all
  other distributions and do not depend on anything kernel-ish for such
  packages. A recompilation of the kernel with different options can
  easily cause what the checks are trying to avoid anyway.

- Make the checks in linux-info non-fatal. I.e., don't die but issue
  warnings instead. That's the *least* that I'd be happy with.

What do you people think the proper solution is? 

-- 
(    Georgi Georgiev   (  MSDOS is not dead, it just smells that way.  (
 )    chutz@×××.net     ) -- Henry Spencer                              )
(   [phone]   (                                               (