[KJ] how to handle Kconfig ?

[KJ] how to handle Kconfig ?

[walter harms]

hi list,
i was playing with 'make randconfig' and found that some issues are 
rooted in the kconfig selection.
e.g.:
you can select X86_NUMAQ without SMP what makes no sence since NUMAQ 
depends on SMP. (adding 'depends on SMP' helps).

Should that be fixed ? does anyone care ?

re,
  walter
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] how to handle Kconfig ?

[Adrian Bunk]

On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 05:19:17PM +0200, walter harms wrote:

> hi list,
> i was playing with 'make randconfig' and found that some issues are 
> rooted in the kconfig selection.
> e.g.:
> you can select X86_NUMAQ without SMP what makes no sence since NUMAQ 
> depends on SMP. (adding 'depends on SMP' helps).
> 
> Should that be fixed ? does anyone care ?

This was already fixed in Linus' tree two months ago with commit 
905c399594f85322a4e513a4b0365b70d6de9fd0 .

> re,
>  walter

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] how to handle Kconfig ?

[walter harms]

that is nice to read but does not answer my question:
1. Should every not working combination by fixed ?
2. Is this a problem for the Janitor ML or the LKML ?

re,
  wh

Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 05:19:17PM +0200, walter harms wrote:
> 
>> hi list,
>> i was playing with 'make randconfig' and found that some issues are 
>> rooted in the kconfig selection.
>> e.g.:
>> you can select X86_NUMAQ without SMP what makes no sence since NUMAQ 
>> depends on SMP. (adding 'depends on SMP' helps).
>>
>> Should that be fixed ? does anyone care ?
> 
> This was already fixed in Linus' tree two months ago with commit 
> 905c399594f85322a4e513a4b0365b70d6de9fd0 .
> 
>> re,
>>  walter
> 
> cu
> Adrian
> 
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

Re: [KJ] how to handle Kconfig ?

[Adrian Bunk]

On Sun, May 28, 2006 at 05:56:26PM +0200, walter harms wrote:
> that is nice to read but does not answer my question:
> 1. Should every not working combination by fixed ?
> 2. Is this a problem for the Janitor ML or the LKML ?

1. at least on i386, every combination should be fixed
   only if extraordinary pathological and nonsensical cases are hard to 
   fix there might be exceptions
2. I'd send them to lkml since they are bug fixes

> re,
>  wh

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors