Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:38:38 +0200 (CEST)
From: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
To: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
cc: Matej Laitl <strohel@gmail.com>, Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>,
       LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] menuconfig: distinguish between selected-by-another
 options and comments
In-Reply-To: <20070916180930.GA9455@uranus.ravnborg.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709162137070.1817@scrub.home>
References: <200709152004.11930.strohel@gmail.com> <20070916111708.GA7362@uranus.ravnborg.org>
 <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709161908050.1817@scrub.home> <20070916180930.GA9455@uranus.ravnborg.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1231
Lines: 38

Hi,

On Sun, 16 Sep 2007, Sam Ravnborg wrote:

> > On Sun, 16 Sep 2007, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > 
> > > But can you take a look at distingushing between non-selectable options
> > > due to dependency issues and seleted-by symbols.
> > 
> > Do you have an example in mind? If a symbol is not changable, but still 
> > visible, a select is usually involved.
> 
> On i86_64 (but I think the arch does not matter).
> make defconfig
> make menuconfig
> 
> At top-level menu I see:
> --- Enable the block layer  --->
> 
> In block/Kconfig we have:
> menuconfig BLOCK
>        bool "Enable the block layer" if EMBEDDED
>        default y
> 
> If EMBEDDED == n then we see the above.
> And this was my first experience with this patch - and it
> took me some thoughts to realise it was the "if EMBEDDED" part
> that made it look like -*-

Indeed, I forgot about this case. Here it's actually the menu entry of a 
symbol that is forced to be visible, because a child entry is visible.

bye, Roman
-
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/