[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070314182528.GN4095@ftp.linux.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 18:25:28 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <Geert.Uytterhoeven@...ycom.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/13] fix ps3fb glue allowing a modular build
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 07:09:40PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Mar 2007, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 10:30:31AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > Maybe not "bool" vs "mbool", but it might be nice to have
> > >
> > > bool FB_PS3
> > > depends strictly on FB
> > >
> > > ie a "depends strictly" refuses to upgrade a bool dependency from "m" to
> > > "y", while a regular depends allows it.
> > >
> > > Or something.. The "depends strictly on X" thing would really be just a
> > > mental shorthand for "depends on (X)=y" (it's actually longer to type, but
> > > I think it's a bit more intuitive, thus "mental shortcut").
> >
> > There's a fun side question, though: what should allmodconfig do? FB=m,
> > FB_PS3=n? Or FB=y, FB_PS3=y?
>
> >From `make help':
> | New config selecting modules when possible
>
> FB can be a module, so FB=m, FB_PS3=n.
>
> It doesn't say anything about things that can't be modules :-)
>
> But I agree the chances of getting a system that doesn't work increase...
No, I realize what kind of behaviour we'll get if we go for dependency on
FB=y. However, if we really introduce a new kconfig primitive, it might
make sense to teach allmodconfig to deal with it.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists