Message-ID: <1435913987.2423.38.camel@tiscali.nl>
Subject: Re: Kconfig: '+config' valid syntax?
From: Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>
To: Andreas Ruprecht <andreas.ruprecht@fau.de>,
        Valentin Rothberg <valentinrothberg@gmail.com>
Cc: rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        hengelein Stefan <stefan.hengelein@fau.de>, linux@dominikbrodowski.net
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2015 10:59:47 +0200
In-Reply-To: <55963AD7.3040905@fau.de>
References: <CAD3Xx4Kh9ASyVYo7ZyRyr2maJbXwbqauQ7tUsLBUHof_hsaP2w@mail.gmail.com>
		 <1435827662.2423.4.camel@tiscali.nl> <55952723.80801@fau.de>
	 <1435839005.2423.28.camel@tiscali.nl> <55963AD7.3040905@fau.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1096
Lines: 30

On vr, 2015-07-03 at 09:33 +0200, Andreas Ruprecht wrote:
> I tested the behaviour on yesterday's linux-next, but the commit
> mentioned above will only complain for invalid characters inside the
> PARAM case and not for COMMANDs. So, as an example, if you write
> something like
> 
> config ACPI_REV_OVERRIDE_POSSIBLE
> 	depends on X86 +
> [...]
> 
> Kconfig will complain about the '+'. This, however, does not apply for
> top-level statements like 'config', 'menuconfig', and so on.

Which might explain why this silly mistake went unnoticed. (And, as I
think you implied, it doesn't help that the empty rule we're hitting
here is not commented.)

So the naive solution seems to be to also add the warning to COMMAND's
rule for '.'. A quick test suggest that would work. Am I missing some
obvious downside with that solution?

Thanks,


Paul Bolle
--
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/