From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:44943 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757283Ab2JKU1m (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Oct 2012 16:27:42 -0400 Message-ID: <50772BB8.6080404@suse.cz> Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 22:27:36 +0200 From: Michal Marek MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Documentation of kconfig language differs from implementation regarding existence of symbols References: <1940598.VZE8PFWQyj@tacticalops> In-Reply-To: <1940598.VZE8PFWQyj@tacticalops> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Martin Walch Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, Randy Dunlap , Arnaud Lacombe Dne 10.10.2012 02:17, Martin Walch napsal(a): > The file linux/Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt says: > >> The following two methods produce the same kconfig symbol >> dependencies but differ greatly in kconfig symbol existence >> (production) in the generated config file. >> >> case 1: >> >> config FOO tristate "about foo" depends on BAR >> >> vs. case 2: >> >> if BAR config FOO tristate "about foo" endif >> >> In case 1, the symbol FOO will always exist in the config file >> (given no other dependencies). In case 2, the symbol FOO will >> only exist in the config file if BAR is enabled. > > However, I can not reproduce this. The attached file contains both > cases. When running make menuconfig, setting BAR0 and BAR1 both to > n, and saving the configuration, there is neither FOO0 nor FOO1 in > the resulting configuration file. Indeed, that paragraph seems wrong. I think we should revert commit 64b81ed. Randy, Arnaud? Thanks, Michal