From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932936AbXCDPh5 (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Mar 2007 10:37:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932955AbXCDPh5 (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Mar 2007 10:37:57 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:40978 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932936AbXCDPh4 (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Mar 2007 10:37:56 -0500 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: <20070304152506.GC3441@stusta.de> References: <20070304152506.GC3441@stusta.de> <20070304041111.1d2774e7.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070302030026.5eef0c92.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070302030405.22f78999.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <45EAB46F.1030709@gmail.com> <14778.1173021069@redhat.com> To: Adrian Bunk Cc: Andrew Morton , Maciej Rutecki , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Re: 2.6.21-rc2-mm1] #error no ROMFS backing store interface configured X-Mailer: MH-E 8.0; nmh 1.1; GNU Emacs 22.0.50 Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2007 15:35:14 +0000 Message-ID: <15200.1173022514@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Adrian Bunk wrote: > Is > > CONFIG_BLOCK=y > CONFIG_ROMFS_FS=y > CONFIG_ROMFS_ON_BLOCK=n > CONFIG_ROMFS_ON_MTD=y > > a reasonable configuration that should be supported, or can we turn > CONFIG_ROMFS_ON_BLOCK always on if CONFIG_BLOCK=y? Hmmm... I don't really know the answer to that, apart from it depends. On a non-embedded device, it's entirely reasonable, I think, to turn CONFIG_ROMFS_ON_BLOCK on if CONFIG_BLOCK is on, no questions asked. However, on an embedded device you might want the extra option. David