lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Jul]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Re: 2.4.6p6: dep_{bool,tristate} $CONFIG_ARCH_xxx bugs
Hi Keith, Adam.

>> Does anyone know if there is any code that would break if we
>> put quotation marks around the $CONFIG_xxxx references in the
>> dep_xxx commands in all of the Config.in files?

> That has the same problem that AC was worried about. Variables
> that used to be treated as "undefined, don't care" are now
> treated as "undefined, assume n and forbid".

Whilst there could easily be problems if we allow that for any of the
variables, it can't be a problem if we restrict it to variables
specifying the architecture in question, as per my previous email.

> As long as there is any ambiguity about how a rule is meant to
> treat undefined variables, treating all undefined variables as
> 'n' is not safe. Before making a global change like this, first
> verify that no rule treats undefined variables as "don't care".
> Otherwise something will break.

Agreed.

Best wishes from Riley.

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:55    [W:0.310 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site