linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] WAN Kconfig: change "depends on HDLC" to "select"

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <463FADB7.3080900@oracle.com>
Date:	Mon, 07 May 2007 15:52:39 -0700
From:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
To:	Satyam Sharma <satyam.sharma@...il.com>
CC:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>,
	Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] WAN Kconfig: change "depends on HDLC" to "select"

Satyam Sharma wrote:
> On 5/8/07, Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 07 May 2007 16:31:48 -0400 Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>
>> > Satyam Sharma wrote:
>> > > Yes, mixing select and depends is a recipe for build disasters. Call
>> > > me a rabid fanatic, but I would in fact go as far as to say that this
>> > > whole "select" thing in the Kconfig process is one big BUG, and not a
>> > > feature. People are lazy by nature and would rather just "select" a
>> > > dependency for their config option than burden users with several
>> > > "depends".
>> >
>> > Tough, the kernel community has voted against you.
>>
>> Andrew (usually) implores people not to use "select" and I agree
>> with him.
>>
>> > It makes far more sense to include a driver during kernel 
>> configuration,
>> > and have that driver pull in its libraries via 'select'.  The lame
>> > alternative requires developers to know which libraries they need 
>> BEFORE
>> > picking their drivers, which is backwards and requires legwork on the
>> > part of the kernel developer.
>>
>> Developers?  If you had said "users," I might agree, but IMO it's
>> OK (or even Good) for developers to know what libraries their code
>> uses/requires.  Yes, that's a good thing.
> 
> You're absolutely right, but to give Jeff the benefit of the doubt I'm
> sure he _meant_ "users" there although he said "developers". Stating
> the obvious, the developer _has_ to know what stuff his code uses
> anyway, otherwise what does he "select"s or "depends" his config
> option on.
> 
> As for users, we _can_ avoid pitfalls by building a complete
> dependency tree and just selecting _everything_ that we require for a
> particular config option to be selected, but some users could
> conceivably prefer only being _told_ about what else they need to
> successfully pick a config option (than everything just getting in
> behind their backs). Actually (correct me if I'm wrong), this is not
> presently possible: an option is not visible unless dependencies are
> already picked. Just a suggestion, though.

That's correct for menuconfig.  For xconfig, there are GUI options to
	Show Name
	Show Range
	Show Data
	Show All Options
	Show Debug Info

I often have all of them enabled.

-- 
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
-
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/