From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932307AbYD1GlO (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Apr 2008 02:41:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757496AbYD1Gk6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Apr 2008 02:40:58 -0400 Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:34828 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756454AbYD1Gk6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Apr 2008 02:40:58 -0400 Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 23:40:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20080427.234058.210327912.davem@davemloft.net> To: arjan@infradead.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Kconfig 'depend' vs. 'select' From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <20080427215840.0961be81@laptopd505.fenrus.org> References: <20080427.174536.62560212.davem@davemloft.net> <20080427215840.0961be81@laptopd505.fenrus.org> X-Mailer: Mew version 5.2 on Emacs 22.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Arjan van de Ven Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 21:58:40 -0700 > 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) We want to avoid the problem of users having to sift through the dependency chain just to figure something like that out. It's rediculious to require a user to know if the obscure LEDS subsystem is already set modular or not, for some unrelated reason, in order to figure out how to build the wireless driver they want statically into the kernel. The whole idea behind my suggestion is that the user doesn't have to know any of this implementation crap. They just say "I want wireless, and I want wireless driver X built statically into my kernel, I don't care how you do it."