On Monday 08 September 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
Folk have been migrating already. IMO there's no rush ... but
similarly, retrograde motion should be discouraged. (Same issue
with essentially all legacy code in the tree.)
The same benefit always found in sharing infrastructure. Lots
of little differences/bugs go away. Infrastructure improvements
and bugfixes get leveraged. Dead and crufticious code can vanish.
And so forth.
So you affirmed that there was no override, AND that it was
previously treated as junk DNA (ignored). So just what were
you disagreeing with me about??
I have a hard time calling something a regression which
was never really a supported configuration. And which
still *JUST WORKS* in those defconfigs ... given all that,
it's hard to argue that something is actually broken.
Kconfig is not about letting Aunt Tillie configure kernels
without being able to shoot herself in the foot. That
discussion has been had (at length!) before. Result, we
have a much better kernel config framework ... but still
don't facilitate "Kconfig-4-dummiez" audiences.