Re: [PATCH] Kconfig fix (BLK_DEV_FD dependencies)
Date: Tue Sep 06 2005 - 10:23:55 EST
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 05:05:33PM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > We could go for your "allow" form, but what else would need it? USB gadget
> > stuff with its "must have at most one low-level driver, high-level drivers
> > should be allowed only if a low-level one is present"? RTC mess is better
> > solved in other ways, PARPORT_PC is mostly solved by now, what's left?
> > VGA_CONSOLE? I really don't see enough uses for such construct...
> It would be mostly useful for arm/mips with their millions of
> configurations. Adding or removing one of them would become easier if the
> references to it aren't spread over the complete.
> Basically select is already used (and sometimes abused) this way.
One major problem with that: unless you accept bare allow and/or select
(not as part of config <something>), we _still_ get these noise symbols,
just to have some place where that "allow" clause could live.
IOW, you get something like
in the same places where I do
with the only difference being that in your variant symbol will be 100%
semantics-free - it's just a workaround for Kconfig syntax problem.
Are you up to such change? If so, I'll just take current patch and do
pretty much a search-and-replace on it, turning unconditional instances
of these suckers (i.e. in absense of subarchitectures) into plain
# there's a glue for PC-like FDC
If you insist on having dummy config around allow/select, I don't see any
real benefits in using "allow" form...
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/