Re: 2.6.16-rc4-mm1

[Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>]

Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 03:11:36PM +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> 
>>Ideally this dependency should be enforced by Kconfig. I'm not sure
>>if it is possible to express something like "IP_DCCP_CCID2 and
>>IP_DCCP_CCID3 depend on DCCP, DCCP requires at least one of both
>>to be enabled". Can someone more familiar with Kconfig than me
>>comment on this? Otherwise the #error should be moved to
>>net/dccp/options.c to keep dccp.h usable without dccp enabled.
> 
> 
> I can try to do it, but I need the exact semantics.
> 
> Should all of the following stay allowed configurations?
> 
> CONFIG_IP_DCCP=y
> CONFIG_IP_DCCP_CCID2=m
> CONFIG_IP_DCCP_CCID3=n
> 
> CONFIG_IP_DCCP=y
> CONFIG_IP_DCCP_CCID2=y
> CONFIG_IP_DCCP_CCID3=m

Arnaldo apparently wants to fix it differently, but maybe you could help
us with conntrack :) CONFIG_IP_NF_CONNTRACK and CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK
should be mutually exclusive. Specifying

CONFIG_IP_NF_CONNTRACK
	depends on CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK=n

CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK
	depends on CONFIG_IP_NF_CONNTRACK=n

will avoid asking for NF_CONNTRACK when IP_NF_CONNTRACK is set, but not
the other way around.