2.6.35.10-74 compilation (and build) problems

[Don Zickus]

On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 03:45:06PM +0000, Mr Dash Four wrote:
> 
> >>The patch should be transferring my options - it doesn't, end of!
> >
> >It did and worked perfect.  The problem was you overrode CONFIG_STAGING
> >which in turn disabled things that you cared about.
> It does not transfer the DRM_NOUVEAU group of options, among others,
> nor does it issue a warning, so from my point of view it is not
> doing its job.

If we modified the config files to do what you wanted, it would spew
hundreds of warnings.  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.

Apparently we can't win with you.

> 
> OK, I now understand the reason for this - some bright spark (it
> wasn't you Jarod, was it?), for whatever reason, decided to put the
> entire group of nouveau drivers in the staging area for .35 and
> .37-2 kernels. I cannot understand why it was done, provided that
> the drivers were in the mainstream for .34 (and prior) kernel
> release, but the way I look at it I should have at least been given
> a warning that these options cannot be transferred over - not be
> silently ignored!

That is the way Fedora maintainers expect it and prefer it.  Don't like
it, provide a patch or file a bug.

> 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.

> >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.

Good luck.

Cheers,
Don