| Message ID | 20170117225854.2544-1-arnout@mind.be |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
Hello, On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 23:58:54 +0100, Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) wrote: > Inspired on the confusion in [1], we want to warn the user that building > without busybox may not lead to a working system. > > [1] https://bugs.busybox.net/show_bug.cgi?id=9526 > > Signed-off-by: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <arnout@mind.be> > --- > Better wording is certainly welcome! > --- > package/busybox/Config.in | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) Applied to master, thanks. Thomas
diff --git a/package/busybox/Config.in b/package/busybox/Config.in index 7ef3f0eda8..504cd8a65a 100644 --- a/package/busybox/Config.in +++ b/package/busybox/Config.in @@ -77,6 +77,9 @@ endif if !BR2_PACKAGE_BUSYBOX # kconfig doesn't support else +comment "You may need to enable other packages to get a working system" +comment "You better know what you're doing!" + # This option is not an option of Busybox, it can be selected even if # Busybox is not enabled. This dummy option ensures that packages that # depend on BR2_PACKAGE_BUSYBOX_SHOW_OTHERS are visible when Busybox
Inspired on the confusion in [1], we want to warn the user that building without busybox may not lead to a working system. [1] https://bugs.busybox.net/show_bug.cgi?id=9526 Signed-off-by: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <arnout@mind.be> --- Better wording is certainly welcome! --- package/busybox/Config.in | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)