On Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 05:43:54PM -0500, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Tom Rini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > unless (ISA or PCI) suppress dependent IDE > > > > Just a minor point, but what about non-PCI/ISA ide? > > The CML1 rules seem to imply that this set is empty.
It's not. In fact, I don't really see that implication either. There's lots of drivers hidden under a CONFIG_PCI check, but nothing under an ISA check. From ~line 104 to ~136 I suspect are all non-PCI and non-ISA chipsets. > > > unless (X86 and PCI and EXPERIMENTAL) or PPC or ARM or SPARC suppress dependent >IEEE1394 > > > > Wouldn't the experimental be global? And maybe the PCI too? > > I don't understand what change you are suggesting. unless EXPERIMENTAL and (((X86 or PPC or SPARC) and PCI) or ARM) Since the experimental tag I believe would be a global thing, and I'm thinking that ARM probably implies !PCI (since it does so often, but I don't know for sure..). > > > It seems to me *extremely* unlikely that a typical patch from a PPC > > > maintainer would mess with any of these! They're rules that are likely to > > > be written once at the time a new port is added to the tree and seldom or > > > ever changed afterwards. > > > > But they will be modified for new arch X, or when constraint X (like > > PCI) is removed. > > Yes. Not typical than, but it could/will happen, from arch maintainer Y. -- Tom Rini (TR1265) http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ _______________________________________________ kbuild-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kbuild-devel
