On 12/28/10 11:38, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 08:50 -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: >> On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 10:39:14 -0600 James Bottomley wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 08:29 -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: >>>> On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 17:30:49 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> [The mirroring on kernel.org is running slowly] >>>>> >>>>> Changes since 20101227: >>>> >>>> >>>> warning: (TARGET_CORE && GFS2_FS) selects CONFIGFS_FS which has unmet direct dependencies (SYSFS) >>>> >>>> from: >>>> >>>> menuconfig TARGET_CORE >>>> tristate "Generic Target Core Mod (TCM) and ConfigFS Infrastructure" >>>> select CONFIGFS_FS >>>> >>>> but CONFIGFS_FS depends on SYSFS, so TARGET_CORE should either depend on SYSFS >>>> or (eek) it should select SYSFS. >>> >>> The latter, I think (and actually, configfs should select sysfs). All >>> these unmet dependencies are a minefield. >> >> It's just another language to deal with. Not a big deal, except for the >> twists that EXPERIMENTAL injects into it. > > I agree with James on this one.. Attached is a patch to select SYSFS > and fix up some extra whitespace breakage. (jlbec CC'ed) and I am not surprised. James is a more liberal 'select'or than I am. > Thanks, > > --nab > > diff --git a/fs/configfs/Kconfig b/fs/configfs/Kconfig > index 13587cc..6874d75 100644 > --- a/fs/configfs/Kconfig > +++ b/fs/configfs/Kconfig > @@ -1,11 +1,11 @@ > config CONFIGFS_FS > tristate "Userspace-driven configuration filesystem" > - depends on SYSFS > + select SYSFS > help > - configfs is a ram-based filesystem that provides the converse > - of sysfs's functionality. Where sysfs is a filesystem-based > - view of kernel objects, configfs is a filesystem-based manager > - of kernel objects, or config_items. > + configfs is a ram-based filesystem that provides the converse RAM-based > + of sysfs's functionality. Where sysfs is a filesystem-based > + view of kernel objects, configfs is a filesystem-based manager > + of kernel objects, or config_items. > > - Both sysfs and configfs can and should exist together on the > - same system. One is not a replacement for the other. > + Both sysfs and configfs can and should exist together on the > + same system. One is not a replacement for the other. > > -- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** desserts: http://www.xenotime.net/linux/recipes/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
