Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 14:42:02 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 14:42:02 -0500 Received: from louise.pinerecords.com ([213.168.176.16]:9411 "EHLO louise.pinerecords.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 14:42:01 -0500 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 20:50:24 +0100 From: Tomas Szepe To: Roman Zippel Cc: Linus Torvalds , lkml Subject: Re: [RFC] top-level config menu dependencies Message-ID: <20030102195024.GC17053@louise.pinerecords.com> References: <20030101162519.GF15200@louise.pinerecords.com> <3E143F74.434AD08B@linux-m68k.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E143F74.434AD08B@linux-m68k.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2075 Lines: 58 > [zippel@linux-m68k.org] > > > While converting the way submenus appear in menuconfig depending on > > their main, parent config option, I stumbled upon certain subsystems > > (such as MTD or IrDA) that should clearly have an on/off switch directly > > in the main menu so that one doesn't have to enter the corresponding > > submenus to even see if they're enabled or disabled. > > > > Since the new kernel configurator would have no problems with such > > a setup, I'm posting this RFC to get the general opinion on whether > > this should be carried on with. I'm willing to create and send in > > the patches. > > While all config programs should be able to handle this, it might look a > bit strange. Especially the split view of xconfig relies a bit on the > current organisation of the config data. > My idea to handle this would be to turn e.g.: > > menu "Memory Technology Devices (MTD)" > > config MTD > tristate "Memory Technology Device (MTD) support" > > into something like this: > > menuconfig MTD > tristate "Memory Technology Device (MTD) support" > > This would give the front ends the most flexibility. The required > changes are quite small, so it should be doable for 2.6. I'm not > completely sure about the syntax yet, but above is the most likely > version. If I understand you correctly, what you are proposing is equivalent to how the following currently works: config MTD tristate "Memory Technology Device (MTD) support" menu "Memory Technology Device (MTD) support" depends on MTD ... endmenu It seems to me the infrastructure you've provided by kconfig is completely sufficient -- it's the config frontends that would require minor updates (xconfig mainly, menuconfig seems to be working nicely -- at least with the setup I outlined above). -- Tomas Szepe - 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/