On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 01:28:29PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote: > J. Bruce Fields wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 05:10:57PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote: >>> On Feb 12, 2008, at 4:23 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:12:16PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote: >>>>> Recently, commit 440bcc59 added a reverse dependency to fs/Kconfig to >>>>> ensure that PROC_FS was enabled if NFSD_V4 was enabled. >>>>> >>>>> There is a guideline in Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt >>>>> that >>>>> states "In general use select only for non-visible symbols (no >>>>> prompts >>>>> anywhere) and for symbols with no dependencies." >>>>> >>>>> A quick grep around other Kconfig files reveals that no entry >>>>> currently >>>>> uses "select PROC_FS" -- every one uses "depends on". Thus >>>>> CONFIG_NFSD_V4 >>>>> should use "depends on PROC_FS" as well. >>>> OK. >>>> >>>>> For SUNRPC_GSS, it's a little more complex. Other entries can >>>>> "select" >>>>> SUNRPC_GSS, as it is non-visible. However, the guideline suggests an >>>>> entry can't "select" it if it has a dependency (such as PROC_FS). >>>>> So, we add forward dependencies on PROC_FS to RPCSEC_GSS_FOO instead. >>>> This also makes the client dependent on PROC_FS, which it wasn't >>>> before. >>>> >>>> I assume nobody cares? >>> Huh? If I disable PROC_FS, I can still select the NFS client >>> options, even NFSv4. >> >> OK. I'm confused, then: >> >> NFS_V4 selects RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5 >> RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5 (after this patch) depends on PROC_FS >> >> What am I missing? > > It appears that the "select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5" is a no-op if > RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5 hasn't met it's forward dependencies.
Oh, OK, I didn't understand that. However, this means that it's no longer possible to build a V4 client with krb5 support without also including PROC_FS. So I think we can't apply this as is. --b. - 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
