Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 22 May 2007 23:16:59 +0530 | From | "Satyam Sharma" <> | Subject | Re: RFC: kconfig select warnings bogus? |
| |
On 5/22/07, Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de> wrote: > Satyam Sharma wrote: > > On 5/22/07, Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de> wrote: > >> >> > On 5/20/07, Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de> wrote: > >> >> >> depends on !PLATFORM_X || HELPER_N_ON_PLATFORM_X > ... > >> This is a synthetic example which might not have a real-world application.] > > > > Well, it is not relevant / equivalent to any of the four symbols that caused the > > warnings that this thread is about, at least. > > (Have I ever said that this concrete expression can be used in whatever > fix?) > > ... > > and as I said, this was totally *not* the problem being discussed / > > solved in this thread (and by that patch). > > My point was not about that particular expression. My point was: > > I'm not advocating any specific fixes or pseudo-fixes. > I'm advocating the notation of dependencies in the direction > "A requires B". > > When I said "The standard and maintainable way (for drivers at least) > is..." I didn't mean the example expression, I meant the *direction* in > which the example was stating dependencies.
In that case I wish "the points" you make on threads are relevant to them. - 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/
| |