If we modified the config files to do what you wanted, it would spew
hundreds of warnings.
If hundreds of options have been ignored, then yes - I have
no problem
with that (contrary to what you may be thinking).
The way the Fedora config files work is that they
are mashed together and the Kconfig files are expected filter out the ones
that do not belong to the particular arch-variant. If it spewed out
hundreds of warnings you would be sitting here complaining that it is too
noisy and you couldn't notice your config option was dropped.
How did you figure that one out exactly?! Read again what I wrote
earlier - I will have no problem with 'hundreds of warnings' provided
the same amount of options have been ignored and/or silently dropped -
no problem at all. You are the one who assume (rather wrongly, as it
turns out) that I will be moaning about these warnings. Based on what
exactly is that assumption of yours?
That is the way Fedora maintainers expect it and prefer it.
Well, I am not a Fedora maintainer and I do not like it, so there. As I
already pointed out - if a set of options have been silently ignored I
should at least be given a warning otherwise there is no way I will
notice this until the kernel is built and even then I have to "swim
through the sea of endless config options" in order to find out. I
thought I was very clear on this.
> What happens if further down the line someone decides to place
some
> more drivers in the staging area - do I have to spent another week
> to ten days posting in this mailing list to find out what is going
> on?! Wouldn't you agree that it would be much easier for people like
> myself if there was a warning in place and I knew well in advance
> what has been silently ignored, or, for whatever reason, discarded
> during the kernel build instead of 'swim through the sea of endless
> config options' as you eloquently put it?
>
Then for god's sake just use an upstream kernel with your own personal
config options. Stop wasting our time here.
What I do and choose is my own business, besides, the last time I
checked I am not holding you at gunpoint to respond to my posts with
mindless ramblings, am I?
>> Let Fedora choose the rest for you.
>>
> My past experience tells me that is, most often than not, not the
> best course of action - relying on Fedora to do my job is not always
> a good idea.
>
Then I guess we are done here. I tried to volunteer my time to help, but
now you want something that Fedora really doesn't want to support and were
provided a wiki page that explicitly said that.
If Fedora doesn't want/can't be bothered to fix something which is, and
has always been, wrong, then yes - we are 'done here' indeed.