On Wed, 12 Jan 2011 13:35:10 -0500 (EST) Len Brown <lenb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Do I care about the phantom configs that would be possible > if these false dependencies were not in place. No, > not until somebody invents such a system, > and may be not even then. > > Is there a user out there on LKML who can dream up > a use for one of these phantom configs and claim that > his life will end if he'd prevented from building it? > Sure. Does he suffer from a total lack of perspective? > Yes. These unusable config combinations should be prevented via Kconfig. That prevents users from selecting them, which otherwise adds to our workload and to theirs. It also prevents false-positives during our useful randconfig testing. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
