From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lb3-smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net ([194.109.24.30]:35663 "EHLO lb3-smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754877AbbGCI7u (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2015 04:59:50 -0400 Message-ID: <1435913987.2423.38.camel@tiscali.nl> Subject: Re: Kconfig: '+config' valid syntax? From: Paul Bolle Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2015 10:59:47 +0200 In-Reply-To: <55963AD7.3040905@fau.de> References: <1435827662.2423.4.camel@tiscali.nl> <55952723.80801@fau.de> <1435839005.2423.28.camel@tiscali.nl> <55963AD7.3040905@fau.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Andreas Ruprecht , Valentin Rothberg Cc: rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hengelein Stefan , linux@dominikbrodowski.net On vr, 2015-07-03 at 09:33 +0200, Andreas Ruprecht wrote: > I tested the behaviour on yesterday's linux-next, but the commit > mentioned above will only complain for invalid characters inside the > PARAM case and not for COMMANDs. So, as an example, if you write > something like > > config ACPI_REV_OVERRIDE_POSSIBLE > depends on X86 + > [...] > > Kconfig will complain about the '+'. This, however, does not apply for > top-level statements like 'config', 'menuconfig', and so on. Which might explain why this silly mistake went unnoticed. (And, as I think you implied, it doesn't help that the empty rule we're hitting here is not commented.) So the naive solution seems to be to also add the warning to COMMAND's rule for '.'. A quick test suggest that would work. Am I missing some obvious downside with that solution? Thanks, Paul Bolle