2.6 bug: kconfig implementation doesn't match the spec
From: Adrian Bunk (bunk_at_fs.tum.de)
Date: 08/08/03
- Previous message: Adrian Bunk: "Surprising Kconfig depends semantics"
- Next in thread: Roman Zippel: "Re: 2.6 bug: kconfig implementation doesn't match the spec"
- Reply: Roman Zippel: "Re: 2.6 bug: kconfig implementation doesn't match the spec"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 16:51:08 +0200 To: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
Hi Roman,
the implementation of the !-operator doesn't match the spec in
Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt
kconfig-language.txt says:
<-- snip -->
...
'!' <expr> (5)
...
(5) Returns the result of (2-/expr/).
...
An expression can have a value of 'n', 'm' or 'y' (or 0, 1, 2
respectively for calculations). A menu entry becomes visible when it's
expression evaluates to 'm' or 'y'.
...
<-- snip -->
The current implementation evaluates !m to 0 instead of 1.
An example:
config FOO
tristate
default m
config BAR
tristate
default y if !FOO
default n
According to the kconfig spec BAR should be y, but the implementation in
2.6.0-mm5 sets BAR to n.
BTW:
The semantics of the implemention seems to be a bit less surprising
than the semantics of the spec.
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: Adrian Bunk: "Surprising Kconfig depends semantics"
- Next in thread: Roman Zippel: "Re: 2.6 bug: kconfig implementation doesn't match the spec"
- Reply: Roman Zippel: "Re: 2.6 bug: kconfig implementation doesn't match the spec"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
