On 19 Oct 00 at 11:00, Tom Rini wrote:
> --- fs/nls/Config.in.orig Thu Oct 19 09:11:48 2000
> +++ fs/nls/Config.in Thu Oct 19 09:49:53 2000
> @@ -4,8 +4,13 @@
>
> # msdos and Joliet want NLS
> if [ "$CONFIG_JOLIET" = "y" -o "$CONFIG_FAT_FS" != "n" \
> - -o "$CONFIG_NTFS_FS" != "n" -o "$CONFIG_NCPFS_NLS" = "y" \
> - -o "$CONFIG_SMB_FS" != "n" ]; then
> + -o "$CONFIG_NTFS_FS" != "n" -o "$CONFIG_NCPFS_NLS" = "y" ]; then
> + define_bool CONFIG_NLS y
> +else
> + define_bool CONFIG_NLS n
> +fi
> +
> +if [ "$CONFIG_INET" = "y" -a "$CONFIG_SMB_FS" != "n" ]; then
> define_bool CONFIG_NLS y
> else
> define_bool CONFIG_NLS n
It is not correct. At first, duplicated define_bool breaks xconfig (AFAIK),
and worse, first test is ignored at all by your code. Maybe something
like (untested)
if [ "$CONFIG_SMB_FS" = "m" -o "$CONFIG_SMB_FS" = "y" ]; then
define_bool CONFIG_SMB_NLS y
else
define_bool CONFIG_SMB_NLS n
fi
if [ "$CONFIG_JOLIET" = "y" -o "$CONFIG_FAT_FS" != "n" \
-o "$CONFIG_NTFS_FS" != "n" -o "$CONFIG_NCPFS_NLS" = "y" \
-o "$CONFIG_SMB_NLS" = "y"; then
define_bool CONFIG_NLS y
else
define_bool CONFIG_NLS n
fi
could work (I did not checked whether CONFIG_FAT_FS & CONFIG_NTFS_FS
are always defined).
Best regards,
Petr Vandrovec
vandrove@vc.cvut.cz
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 23 2000 - 21:00:15 EST