Re: CONFIG_TINY

[Tom Rini]

On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 06:49:00PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 10:24:05AM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > Yes, and I'm saying that CONFIG_TINY shouldn't exist.  It should be
> > CONFIG_FINE_TUNE (or so), to allow anyone to fine tune the optimization
> > level.
> If the flexibility is wanted then it should be something like:
> CONFIG_TINY_GCCOPTFLAG
> default 2
> It should be a string so the developer can choose freely the optimisation
> level.

Except that it has nothing to do with TINY.

This is where the templates idea that Matt Porter has mentioned comes in
nicely.  Not just 'embedded' can make use of tweaks, everyone can.  And
the default template would be the defaults now, and can be tweaked
easily (and maybe something to select a basic set of defaults, etc).

-- 
Tom Rini (TR1265)
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/