On 7/19/06, [email protected] <[email protected]> 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 [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
