On Jan 28, 2008, at 4:48 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 04:12:26PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
On Jan 28, 2008, at 1:28 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
I don't care either way, but I'm inclined to leave this as is until
someone comes along with really clear and convincing criteria for
when
to choose select and when to choose depends.
If NFSv4 or GSS *require* procfs to work, then "depends" is the right
choice.
Neither CONFIG_NFS_FS nor CONFIG_NFSD_FS seem to be following this
rule?
After looking into this, I've found that there are a couple of
reasons for this.
First, as I posted last week, "select" is usually OK for non-visible
CONFIG options, like LOCKD or SUNRPC.
But, second, we have a mix of boolean and tristate variables here --
and a boolean that selects another tristate variable can only choose
Y or N (not M). So the "select ... if ..." clauses are placed up in
CONFIG_NFSD on purpose in order to allow the selected variables to be
set to M if CONFIG_NFSD is set to M. See commit f05e15b5.
I'm not inclined to adjust any of this for the moment.
And, a quick grep around other Kconfig files reveals that no-one else
uses "select PROC_FS" -- every case uses "depends on". Thus
CONFIG_NFSD_V4 should use "depends on PROC_FS" as well. Also, this
patch doesn't touch the client side -- should CONFIG_NFSV4 depend on
PROC_FS too?
Since SUNRPC_GSS is already a non-visible config option and is set
via "select", it's more difficult to say with certainty how a
"depends on PROC_FS" clause should be constructed for that. However,
MAINTAINERS suggests that [EMAIL PROTECTED] might be an appropriate
place to ask about these things.
--
Chuck Lever
chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
