> Hi
> This part of your patch is incorrect:
>
> > @@ -69,20 +69,20 @@
> > fi
> > if [ "$CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL" = "y" ]; then
> > tristate 'NFS server support' CONFIG_NFSD
> > - if [ "$CONFIG_NFSD" != "n" ]; then
> > - bool ' Emulate SUN NFS server' CONFIG_NFSD_SUN
> > - fi
> > + fi
> > + if [ "$CONFIG_NFSD" != "n" ]; then
> > + bool ' Emulate SUN NFS server' CONFIG_NFSD_SUN
> > fi
>
> Notice, that if CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL is set to "n" the CONFIG_NFSD question
> does not appear. In effect you have CONFIG_NFSD not defined.
> It obviously means that $CONFIG_NFSD is not equal to "n".
> This part of your patch should be replaced by something like:
>
> + if [ "$CONFIG_NFSD" = "y" -o "$CONFIG_NFSD" = "m" ]; then
> + bool ' Emulate SUN NFS server' CONFIG_NFSD_SUN
The patch is reversed, which may lead to some of your confusion.
When the patch is correct (see below), it moves the question into the
CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL scoping, satisfying the conditions necessary for the
'CONFIG_NFSD != "n"' test -- namely that CONFIG_NFSD must be defined.
I had already re-sent a better patch privately, but figured the
patch reversal would be obvious so didn't copy the update to the list.
Jeff
Index: Config.in
===================================================================
RCS file: /usr/local/cvsroot/linux_2_2/fs/Config.in,v
retrieving revision 1.1.1.1
diff -u -r1.1.1.1 Config.in
--- Config.in 1999/05/15 01:22:31 1.1.1.1
+++ Config.in 1999/06/10 01:07:30
@@ -69,9 +69,9 @@
fi
if [ "$CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL" = "y" ]; then
tristate 'NFS server support' CONFIG_NFSD
- fi
- if [ "$CONFIG_NFSD" != "n" ]; then
- bool ' Emulate SUN NFS server' CONFIG_NFSD_SUN
+ if [ "$CONFIG_NFSD" != "n" ]; then
+ bool ' Emulate SUN NFS server' CONFIG_NFSD_SUN
+ fi
fi
if [ "$CONFIG_NFS_FS" = "y" -o "$CONFIG_NFSD" = "y" ]; then
define_bool CONFIG_SUNRPC y
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/