On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 11:33 +0100, Michal Marek wrote: > On 2015-01-22 09:35, Paul Bolle wrote: > > In this case 64BIT is set to 'y' (otherwise LBDAF would have been 'y'). > > This isn't a bug issue, of course, but I still can see how this can be > > confusing. Perhaps the last line should read: > > Unmet dependency on: BLOCK [=y] && !64BIT [=y] > > > > Would that help? Or would > > Depends on: BLOCK [=y] && !64BIT [=n] > > > > (ie, print the value if "!64BIT") be clearer? > > How about > > Depends on: (BLOCK [=y] && !64BIT [=y]) [=n] > > ? Or Depends on: BLOCK [=y] && !64BIT [=y] => [=n] Whatever, we'll figure out something. This is a curses UI, isn't it? Could we use color to distinguish the symbols or sub-expressions that are set correctly, for that particular dependency, from those that are not? Paul Bolle -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
