lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jan]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: bogous binfmt_misc patch in 2.2.0-pre1
Date
> Could you please revert the patch you got for binfmt_misc?
> Its wrong as it leaves binfmt_misc in a completely unusuable
> state if CONFIG_PROC_FS is not set. (patch to revert the
> changes and one pending change from me (remove stale variable)
> is attached)

Its right because it doesn't even compile otherwise.

> Although there is no chance of misconfiguration if one reads
> the Configure.help entry, to prevent even silly misconfiguration

People don't 8(

> you may consider patch #2, that makes CONFIG_PROC_FS depend
> on CONFIG_BINFMT_MISC (yes, I dont like the order, too - but
> there is no way to make CONFIG_BINFMT_MISC depend on CONFIG_PROC_FS),

Michael Chastain and others have been talking about this - there is a possible
'solution' for 2.3.x - which is to add a

requires CONFIG_something CONFIG_somethingelse

at the end of the scripts. Its just a bit close to 2.2 final to do this.

> or alternatively patch #3, that makes binfmt_misc compile
> conditionaly on CONFIG_PROC_FS (i.e. it leaves the user without
> binfmt_misc, if he/she was unable to select CONFIG_PROC_FS).

That seems sensible. You could also compile it printk("PROCfs support is required") return -ENXIO for PROC_FS=n if that seems better

Alan



-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:49    [W:0.130 / U:0.632 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site