linux-kernel - Re: Kconfig 'depend' vs. '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: <48156F7C.3080402@bfh.ch>
Date:	Mon, 28 Apr 2008 08:32:28 +0200
From:	Seewer Philippe <philippe.seewer@....ch>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Kconfig 'depend' vs. 'select'

Arjan van de Ven wrote:
[snip]
> how far would "if you DEPENDS on FOO, and FOO is =m, you can only be =m or =n" get us?
> or are there hidden traps on this?
> (the hard case is if a non-tristate DEPENDS on a tristate, but... that's a trap anyway)
I guess it depends on the (use-)case. But in general I'd like a system 
like that, especially if it would spew out warnings and errors for cases 
like the one mentioned.
--
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/