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

>> What variables? Please show me a real example.

>Not my job. If you want to make a global change to the meaning of
>undefined config variables, it is your responsibility to show that the
>change has no unwanted side effects. Assuming there are no side
>effects is unsatisfactory in a stable kernel, especially with all the
>config variables in patch sets outside the kernel.

That's not reasonable in the face of what appears to be
completely fabricated myth. You generally can't prove this
kind of a negative for anything. Either you or Alan Cox should
show an example. Can you even show me the code that such an
example would exercise. Can you even write a hypothetical example?

Adam J. Richter __ ______________ 4880 Stevens Creek Blvd, Suite 104
adam@yggdrasil.com \ / San Jose, California 95129-1034
+1 408 261-6630 | g g d r a s i l United States of America
fax +1 408 261-6631 "Free Software For The Rest Of Us."
-
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:0.045 / U:6.908 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site