| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <a781481a0705142002g41312a03nc462fffd0a74310b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 08:32:57 +0530 From: "Satyam Sharma" <satyam.sharma@...il.com> To: "Stefan Richter" <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de> Cc: "Tilman Schmidt" <tilman@...p.cc>, "Jan Engelhardt" <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.22-rc1 On 5/15/07, Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de> wrote: > Tilman Schmidt wrote: > > Am 14.05.2007 22:33 schrieb Jan Engelhardt: > >> * Disabling this menu disables all the fluff inside it, > > except when it doesn't. > > > Another essential piece of information. I seem to remember other > > menus which, when disabled, kept the selection status of the > > options inside and just hid them from view. > > It's a matter of /dependence/ on a menuconfig option whether options > inside the menu will be disabled. Not a matter of being located in the > menu. Yeah, this is a good solution -- making options inside a menuconfig also dependent on it makes sense. > If menuconfig isn't used with strict discipline, we end up with > inconsistent and misleading presentation of the kernel configuration. Yes, this really requires discipline on the part of those who add new config options, to also "depends on" the menuconfig they're inside, otherwise we end up with inconsistencies. We can't really make this automatic, or can we? - 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