| 1 |
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 09:27:19 -0500, Tanstaafl wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > I see what you mean about the guide and consider it wrong, especially |
| 4 |
> > for an advanced section. You are more likely to run into problems |
| 5 |
> > when not reusing your old config that when using make oldconfig. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> But... my understanding is that, by copying your old .config to the new |
| 8 |
> kernel dir before running make menuconfig, you *are* reusing your old |
| 9 |
> config... I sure hope I'm not reading *that* wrong. ;) |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
No you're not. But it is far easier to miss important changes without |
| 12 |
oldconfig to point them out to you by shoving them in your face. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> > Even the comment about context isn't really true, as oldconfig shows |
| 15 |
> > some context and the same help that menuconfig does. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Ok... well, this is how I've always done it, and I'm comfortable with |
| 18 |
> it, so don't see a reason to change. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Each to their own. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> Maybe I'll try running make oldconfig one day just to see how it |
| 23 |
> differs... |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
It's not black magic, it just shows you any new options that are not |
| 26 |
present in your config, offers you choices along with a default and a |
| 27 |
chance to read the help text for that option. If you're feeling paranoid, |
| 28 |
diff the config it generates with the one you started with. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
BING But It's Not Google |
Archives