[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200607192041.k6JKfK6u005519@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 16:41:20 -0400
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc: Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Fwd: Using select in boolean dependents of a tristate symbol
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 16:17:38 EDT, Dmitry Torokhov said:
> Another question for you - what is the best way to describe
> dependancy of a sub-option on a subsystem so you won't end up with the
> subsystem as a module and user built in. Something like
>
> config IBM_ASM
> tristate "Device driver for IBM RSA service processor"
> depends on X86 && PCI && EXPERIMENTAL
> ...
> config IBM_ASM_INPUT
> bool "Support for remote keyboard/mouse"
> depends on IBM_ASM && (INPUT=y || INPUT=IMB_ASM)
>
> But the above feels yucky. Could we have something like:
>
> depends on matching(INPUT, IBM_ASM)
What feels yucky is the dependency of a 'bool' on a tristate. Does the
ASM_INPUT get used in places where the source file can only be a builtin,
not a module?
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists