Re: Fwd: Using select in boolean dependents of a tristate symbol

[Roman Zippel]

Hi,

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:

> Another question for you  - what is the best way to describe
> dependancy of a sub-option on a subsystem so you won't end up with the
> subsystem as a module and user built in. Something like
> 
> config IBM_ASM
>        tristate "Device driver for IBM RSA service processor"
>        depends on X86 && PCI && EXPERIMENTAL
> ...
> config IBM_ASM_INPUT
>        bool "Support for remote keyboard/mouse"
>        depends on IBM_ASM && (INPUT=y || INPUT=IMB_ASM)
> 
> But the above feels yucky. Could we have something like:
> 
>         depends on matching(INPUT, IBM_ASM)

This is not really descriptive of what it does, is it?
Linus suggested a syntax like (IBM_ASM && IMB_ASM<=INPUT)
Another alternative which works now is to just disable the one invalid 
case explicitely:

	depends on IBM_ASM && INPUT
	depends on !(IBM_ASM=y && INPUT=m)

bye, Roman
-
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/