Re: [PATCH] arm Kconfig fixes

[viro]

On Sat, Aug 28, 2004 at 10:22:06PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Bah, I *knew* I'd miss one. I even read the Kconfig twice after missing IA64.
> > I suck. I still stand by my claim that it would look better though.
> 
> Completely agreed on that one.  Negative depencies are a bad idea in general.

ACK.

How about adding HAS_AGP into platform Kconfig and making that animal
dependent on it?

BTW, AFAICS a legitimate form of negative dependency is && (!FOO || BROKEN)
and it's common enough to consider adding a separate
	broken if <expression>
to config language.  It would be interpreted as && (!<expr> || BROKEN) added
to dependencies, but would document the situation better.
-
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/