From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Markus Heidelberg Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 00:26:53 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] Synchronisation of dependencies between Config.in and .mk files ? In-Reply-To: References: <20081027175645.7e7cb096@surf> <200810272247.34068.markus.heidelberg@web.de> Message-ID: <200810280026.53773.markus.heidelberg@web.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Roberto A. Foglietta, 27.10.2008: > 2008/10/27 Markus Heidelberg : > > When reading it from the Makefiles, you couldn't automatically decide whether > > to use "select" or "depends on", because in the Makefile there is no > > difference between them. > > Reading/including only those .mk for which packages has been selected > and the meaning became always: 'select' > > I think the use of "depends on" in Config.in should be used ONLY when > arch restrictions have been involved. Definitely not. For example sdl_image depends on sdl instead of selecting it. So you can have a hierarchical menu in Config.in and hide all the sdl_ packages unless sdl is not activated. Of course this is only possible for packages in direct relation to each other. > Example: I need nfs but nfs 'depends on' rpc... the first time in the > menuconfig I will waste minutes to understand I have to select rpc in > order to select nfs, why? If I want a cold beer I ask for a cold beer. > Why I have to ask "do you have the freezer pluged in", before? It is > obvious that a freezer is needed for a cold beer but it is not obvious > asking for a freezer when you are looking for a beer. There are settings that probably shouldn't be selected automatically, for example such which require a recompilation of the toolchain. In this case there could also be a "comment NFS needs RPC" in the Config.in. But I think that is hard to decide, there shouldn't be too much comments in menuconfig. Markus