From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S261734AbTILPKB (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Fri, 12 Sep 2003 11:10:01 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261735AbTILPKA
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Fri, 12 Sep 2003 11:10:00 -0400
Received: from fed1mtao04.cox.net ([68.6.19.241]:25731 "EHLO
	fed1mtao04.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261734AbTILPJ6
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 12 Sep 2003 11:09:58 -0400
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 08:09:57 -0700
From: Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de>
Cc: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>,
       Eyal Lebedinsky <eyal@eyal.emu.id.au>,
       Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] 2.6.0-test5: serio config broken?
Message-ID: <20030912150956.GF13672@ip68-0-152-218.tc.ph.cox.net>
References: <20030910210443.GG4559@ip68-0-152-218.tc.ph.cox.net> <20030910215136.GP27368@fs.tum.de> <20030910220552.GJ4559@ip68-0-152-218.tc.ph.cox.net> <20030910221710.GT27368@fs.tum.de> <20030910222918.GL4559@ip68-0-152-218.tc.ph.cox.net> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0309111037050.19512-100000@serv> <20030911230448.GA13672@ip68-0-152-218.tc.ph.cox.net> <20030912110902.GF27368@fs.tum.de> <20030912145207.GC13672@ip68-0-152-218.tc.ph.cox.net> <20030912150449.GI27368@fs.tum.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20030912150449.GI27368@fs.tum.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Sep 12, 2003 at 05:04:49PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2003 at 07:52:07AM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> >...
> > With 'oldconfig' / 'config', you could loop until the user selects one
> > of them.  Or, default to the first in the or series that can be
> > selected.
> 
> What if all possible dependencies aren't available because their 
> dependencies aren't fulfilled?

It's one of those recursive problems.  But so long as we don't get
circular dependancies (which would be a bug anyhow, yes?) it should at
least be solvable.

> 
> I agree that there's a problem, but I think a good solution is 
> non-trivial.

Agreed.

-- 
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/