Re: RFC: kconfig select warnings bogus?

["Satyam Sharma" <satyam.sharma@gmail.com>]

On 5/20/07, Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de> wrote:
> Satyam Sharma wrote:
> > On 5/20/07, Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de> wrote:
> >> However you fix it --- don't remove "depends on" or "select".  You can
> >> interchange them, but not remove them, unless there wasn't a dependency
> >> to begin with.
> >
> > They _can_ be removed, with absolutely no build failures at all, because
> > of the "default y if ..." on the dependency that is defined in some
> > arch/.../Kconfig.
>
> You are right, they can be removed, and the Kconfig files can be turned
> into an unmaintainable mess.
>
>         A requires B
>
> Maintainable.
>
>         B serves A
>
> Logically equivalent, yet unmaintainable.

Well, whether it is readable / maintainable is subjective and hence
debatable. I was only answering your *completely misplaced and
incorrect* original comment against the patch where you claimed
that the patch was "totally wrong" because of the way it removed
the "select" ... etc ...

And remember, like I said already, the whole _idea_ is such arch-
specific helper code be not mentioned from arch-agnostic Kconfig
files. You may not like it, but this is the standard / most common way
such cases are handled for tons of other cases in arch/.... Which
is why Adrian's way of solving this (shifting all such arch-specific
helper symbols also to drivers/... and then using depends on select
on it) is not viable.