lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Kconfig 'depend' vs. 'select'
On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 17:45:36 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:

>
> I'm trying to stir up interest in solving a problem that seems to pop
> up frequently. :)
>
> The short story is:
>
> 1) If you say your driver "depend"s on a subsystem providing a set of
> interfaces you need, this doesn't work properly if your driver is
> marked built-in and that subsystem you need is modular for some
> reason.
>
> 2) If you say "select" on some subsystem, to try and solve the
> conflict in #1, that doesn't take care of any dependencies the
> subsystem may have. This can also break the build.
>
> There should be an elegant solution to this problem. But I don't
> think changing how 'select' or 'depend' works is it.
>
> 'depend' as it stands now works fine for purely boolean things like
> "this architecture has or wants FOO". There is no reason to remove
> it or change it's semantics, I think.

how far would "if you DEPENDS on FOO, and FOO is =m, you can only be =m or =n" get us?
or are there hidden traps on this?
(the hard case is if a non-tristate DEPENDS on a tristate, but... that's a trap anyway)

--
If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-28 07:01    [W:0.051 / U:0.516 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site