Re: [PATCH v2] uselib: default depending if libc5 was used

[Josh Triplett]

On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:35:24PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote:
> On 1 December 2015 at 10:46, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 1:31 AM, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 27 Nov 2015 12:07:10 -0800 Josh Triplett <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> IA32_EMULATION depends on X86_64, so doesn't that reduce to:
> >>>       def_bool ALPHA || M68K || SPARC || X86_32 || IA32_EMULATION
> 
> Ok. looks cleaner to me.
> 
> >> It's a bit old fashioned to add an expression like this at the
> >> definition site anyway.  The cool new thing is to do
> >>
> >>         def_bool ARCH_WANT_USELIB
> >>
> >> then go off and define ARCH_WANT_USELIB in the appropriate places in
> >> the per-arch Kconfig files.
> >
> > That's useful for new to-be-implemented features, but this dependency list is
> > (hopefully) cast in stone. No new architecture should need this.
> > So I see no reason to clutter up more Kconfig files.
> 
> I agree. Splitting oneline patch to a patch that changes 5 files around kernel
> tree only risks merge conflicts in this case.

True; I take back what I said about that approach being cleaner.  It
does ease maintenance in cases where the list may change, but in this
case, the list should never change again.
--
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/