Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S966417AbXEVR7R (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 May 2007 13:59:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759012AbXEVR7H (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 May 2007 13:59:07 -0400 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.174]:24469 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758830AbXEVR7E (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 May 2007 13:59:04 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=dqD1wZ4/pXo2fJ6tl9zSw+zpMvWLGrAjlXFeTGXVIZooJjcSQyTpOTYbMeLWRde9E7v5UNsdm5+LMpBcndQODnVJ+a1ZfXbJdyXcyohNmzzfdpAafIMFFoDWHvFWoTON/oFlO8sXjj7QU9Z5JZp93KDYiHDqoX3BQwwDy3a6Dv4= Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 23:29:01 +0530 From: "Satyam Sharma" To: "Stefan Richter" Subject: Re: RFC: kconfig select warnings bogus? Cc: LKML , "Roman Zippel" , "Kumar Gala" , "Simon Horman" , "Adrian Bunk" , "Sam Ravnborg" In-Reply-To: <46532E49.6020402@s5r6.in-berlin.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070519151523.GA26724@uranus.ravnborg.org> <46504876.9040802@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <46505DBD.5010005@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <46532247.6030803@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <46532AA4.6080501@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <46532E49.6020402@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1127 Lines: 23 On 5/22/07, Stefan Richter wrote: > Satyam Sharma wrote: > > On 5/22/07, Stefan Richter wrote: > >> When I said "The standard and maintainable way (for drivers at least) > >> is..." I didn't mean the example expression, I meant the *direction* in > >> which the example was stating dependencies. > > > > In that case I wish "the points" you make on threads are relevant to them. > > My initial reply was on a patch which removed the A-to-B declaration of > dependency. And if you think you can have the "direction of declaration of dependencies" the way you like it, and also (1) preserve current "select"-like behaviour, (2) introduce no build issues, and (3) get rid of the bogus warnings, then: Patches are welcome. (No, suggestions that don't work, or not fully applicable to the case at hand in this thread will NOT do). - 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/