| 1 |
On Saturday 28 July 2012 21:19:44 Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I use both: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Me too (sorry), though I find myself using oldconfig more often than |
| 6 |
menuconfig these days, unless I want to comb right through the config |
| 7 |
looking for things I could improve. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> first oldconfig to find the newly added stuff...then menuconfig, mostly |
| 10 |
> looking for driver pages that have lots of things set - I can't |
| 11 |
> possibly have all of that hardware so logically few things must be |
| 12 |
> set. menuconfig also lets me easily see things I hve never explicitly |
| 13 |
> set (which oldconfig can't do) and labels them (NEW) which is |
| 14 |
> distinctly different to what oldconfig calls new stuff |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Is it really? I thought they ought to be the same. And the only snag |
| 17 |
with menuconfig for finding new options is that you have to navigate every |
| 18 |
single menu - quite time-consuming*. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> And in menuconfig, the / key engages search, just like in vim |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Ah. I knew about the ? key since it's in the prompt. Seems I can drop |
| 23 |
the shift. Ta. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
* Speaking of consuming time, would someone with an i7 please tell me |
| 26 |
how long it takes to compile a new kernel? I'd like to compare it with |
| 27 |
my i5, which after mrproper and copying the .config in from /boot, where |
| 28 |
I store it for safe keeping, was 2 min 7 sec just now. (This is related |
| 29 |
to another thread; perhaps I should have asked this there instead.) |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Rgds |
| 33 |
Peter |
Archives