Re: 2.6 bug: kconfig implementation doesn't match the spec

[Adrian Bunk]

On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 08:01:20PM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:

> Hi,

Hi Roman,

> On Fri, 8 Aug 2003, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> 
> > > You probably forgot to set MODULES, tristate behaves like bool in this 
> > > case and FOO becomes 'y' and '!FOO' is 'n'.
> > 
> > No, this is with CONFIG_MODULES=y.
> 
> How did you set it? I tried your examples and got the expected and correct 
> result.

ups, sorry, you are right. I switched between two trees and these 
examples were with CONFIG_MODULES=n. With CONFIG_MODULES=y I observe the 
correct results.

> > According to your language definition,
> >   m && !m
> > evaluates to "m" (it sounds a bit strange but follows directly from
> > rules (5) and (7) together with the interpretation of "m" as 1 as 
> > explained in the section "Menu dependencies" of
> > Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt).
> 
> BTW the reason for (5) !<expr> -> 2-<expr> is that it becomes possible to 
> do various transformations with the expressions, e.g. !!<expr> == <expr>.

OTOH, the expression
  FOO && !FOO
is not always "n" as you might expect.

> bye, Roman

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
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/