linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kconfig: Sync zconf.y with zconf.tab.c

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Fri, 12 Jan 2018 12:23:52 +0100
From:   Ulf Magnusson <ulfalizer@...il.com>
To:     Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Cc:     "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@...e.fr>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
        Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.com>,
        Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kconfig: Sync zconf.y with zconf.tab.c_shipped

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> wrote:
> 2017-10-05 12:06 GMT+09:00 Ulf Magnusson <ulfalizer@...il.com>:
>> Looks like a change to a comment in zconf.y was never committed, because
>> the updated version only appears it zconf.tab.c_shipped. Update the
>> comment in zconf.y to match.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ulf Magnusson <ulfalizer@...il.com>
>> ---
>>  scripts/kconfig/zconf.y | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/scripts/kconfig/zconf.y b/scripts/kconfig/zconf.y
>> index c8f396c..4b2cf41 100644
>> --- a/scripts/kconfig/zconf.y
>> +++ b/scripts/kconfig/zconf.y
>> @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ static struct menu *current_menu, *current_entry;
>>  } if_entry menu_entry choice_entry
>>
>>  %{
>> -/* Include zconf_id.c here so it can see the token constants. */
>> +/* Include kconf_id.c here so it can see the token constants. */
>>  #include "kconf_id.c"
>>  %}
>
>
> Applied to linux-kbuild/kconfig.
> Thanks!
>
> BTW, I do not know the historical reason
> why zconf instead of kconf in the first place...

I have no idea either. kconfig.{l,y} and kconfig_*() would be a lot
less confusing.

Cheers,
Ulf