Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 18 Jan 2003 02:40:41 +0100 | From | Roman Zippel <> | Subject | Re: questions about config files, I2C and hardware sensors (2.5.59) |
| |
Hi,
"Robert P. J. Day" wrote:
> so the issues: > > 1) trivial: comment is wrong, there is no dependency on > EXPERIMENTAL
This has to be answered by the I2C maintainer.
> 2) since, in the sourcing Kconfig file, I2C_PROC *already* depends > on I2C, is there any practical value in having the dependency > "I2C && I2C_PROC". wouldn't "depends on I2C_PROC" be sufficient?
Yes.
> 3) finally, given that the comment at the top is adamant that > all of these options depend on I2C and I2C_PROC, wouldn't it > be cleaner to just make the menu itself say: > > menu "I2C HW Sensors Mainboard Support" > depends on I2C && I2C_PROC (or just I2C_PROC) > ... > > and let the internal options inherit this dependency?
Yes, the menu entry needs the dependencies as well.
bye, Roman
- 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/
| |