Re: architectures with their own "config PCMCIA"

[Adrian Bunk]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 11:45:21PM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:

> Hi,

Hi Roman,

> On Wed, 11 Aug 2004, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> 
> > Roman, is it intentional that PCMCIA!=n is true if there's no PCMCIA 
> > option, or is it simply a bug?
> 
> Yes, undefined symbols have a (string) value of "" . Maybe it's time to 
> add a warning for such comparisons...

is there any strong reason why undefined symbols aren't equivalent to 
symbols with a value of "n"?

Many !=n seems to be bogus (especially ones from the automatic 
transition to the new Kconfig) and I'll audit them. But rewriting valid 
FOO!=n to (FOO=y || FOO=m) doesn't sound like an improvement.

> bye, Roman

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/