From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 22:49:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 22:49:02 -0400 Received: from pneumatic-tube.sgi.com ([204.94.214.22]:39692 "EHLO pneumatic-tube.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 22:48:54 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 From: Keith Owens To: "Adam J. Richter" cc: rhw@MemAlpha.CX, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rmk@arm.linux.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: 2.4.6p6: dep_{bool,tristate} $CONFIG_ARCH_xxx bugs In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 01 Jul 2001 19:25:11 MST." <200107020225.TAA02230@adam.yggdrasil.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2001 12:48:26 +1000 Message-ID: <22864.994042106@kao2.melbourne.sgi.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 1 Jul 2001 19:25:11 -0700, "Adam J. Richter" wrote: > Does anyone know if there is any code that would break if >we put quotation marks around the $CONFIG_xxxx references in the >dep_xxx commands in all of the Config.in files? That has the same problem that AC was worried about. Variables that used to be treated as "undefined, don't care" are now treated as "undefined, assume n and forbid". As long as there is any ambiguity about how a rule is meant to treat undefined variables, treating all undefined variables as 'n' is not safe. Before making a global change like this, first verify that no rule treats undefined variables as "don't care". Otherwise something will break.