Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 19 Jul 2006 16:50:56 -0400 | From | "Dmitry Torokhov" <> | Subject | Re: Fwd: Using select in boolean dependents of a tristate symbol |
| |
On 7/19/06, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote: > On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 16:17:38 EDT, Dmitry Torokhov said: > > > Another question for you - what is the best way to describe > > dependancy of a sub-option on a subsystem so you won't end up with the > > subsystem as a module and user built in. Something like > > > > config IBM_ASM > > tristate "Device driver for IBM RSA service processor" > > depends on X86 && PCI && EXPERIMENTAL > > ... > > config IBM_ASM_INPUT > > bool "Support for remote keyboard/mouse" > > depends on IBM_ASM && (INPUT=y || INPUT=IMB_ASM) > > > > But the above feels yucky. Could we have something like: > > > > depends on matching(INPUT, IBM_ASM) > > What feels yucky is the dependency of a 'bool' on a tristate. Does the > ASM_INPUT get used in places where the source file can only be a builtin, > not a module? >
In this case ASM_INPUT enables an optional part of a bigger module (IBM_ASM). Sometimes it is done because optional part is too small to be split into a separately loadable module or because it is difficult to implement "attaching" of the optional part at the later time if it is compiled as a module.
-- Dmitry - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |