Does "complete" mean all the ports have also made the change and been merged back?
or reasonably complete, we can change the semantics to
> 'n'=='', which in Configure/Menuconfig can only be enforced in the
> non-$ case (well, unless we use your 'source' statement idea).
I don't think it's good policy to have the $ and non-$ cases behaving
differently if we can avoid it.
> > I find a) more intuitive, for people who know sh, it's pretty
> > clear when we use "$" and when not. Also, for 'if' statements,
> > we'll have to use the "$" variant anyway for all I can see, so I
> > prefer that from a consistency point of view.
> The problem with "intuitive for people who know sh" is that people
> think Config.in *is* shell. They start putting in constructs which
> are not valid Config.in syntax but which *are* valid sh syntax, so
> they work with certain parsers but not others.
Tell me about it ;-) Actually the incidence of this is low, presumably
someone comes along and reports an xconfig failure and the problem gets
fixed. I found only a half-dozen or so of these.
I'm more concerned about subtle dependencies on execution order resulting
from misuse of conditionals.
-- the price of civilisation today is a courageous willingness to prevail, with force, if necessary, against whatever vicious and uncomprehending enemies try to strike it down. - Roger Sandall, The Age, 28Sep2001. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to email@example.com More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/