[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706230049480.1817@scrub.home>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 01:12:29 +0200 (CEST)
From: Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Satyam Sharma <satyam.sharma@...il.com>
cc: Trent Piepho <xyzzy@...akeasy.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...radead.org>,
toralf.foerster@....de, Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>,
Luca Risolia <luca.risolia@...dio.unibo.it>
Subject: Re: Kconfig troubles when using menuconfig - Was: [patch]Re:
[linux-usb-devel] linux-2.6.22-rc5-gf1518a0 build #300 failed in zc0301_core.c
Hi,
On Sat, 23 Jun 2007, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> 1. Kconfig symbols will always have code associated with them.
> That's the entire purpose of Kconfig, is it not?
A possible counter example: CONFIG_SCSI.
(RAID_ATTRS is currently a little misplaced).
It's optional for any config symbol to have any code attached to it,
menuconfig doesn't change anything.
> 2. "menuconfig" symbols, otoh, were _invented_ for another reason
> entirely: presentation and user interface i.e. so that users are able
> to disable entire menus (and all the options contained therein)
> without having to enter into the menu first, and without having to
> disable all options individually (which was the situation that existed
> before the introduction of these menuconfig objects).
Since I'm the one who _invented_ it, I can tell you you're wrong. :)
This functionality isn't limited to menuconfig symbols. The menu option
simply changes how the child symbols can be displayed.
bye, Roman
-
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