From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263201AbTEOAYU (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 May 2003 20:24:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263202AbTEOAYU (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 May 2003 20:24:20 -0400 Received: from durham-24-086.biz.dsl.gtei.net ([4.3.24.86]:16020 "EHLO amanda.mallet-assembly.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263201AbTEOAYT (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 May 2003 20:24:19 -0400 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] new kconfig goodies References: <20030513211749.GA340@gnu.org> From: Michael Alan Dorman Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 20:21:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Roman Zippel's message of "Thu, 15 May 2003 00:11:39 +0200 (CEST)") Message-ID: <87issddpq8.fsf@amanda.mallet-assembly.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1001 (Gnus v5.10.1) Emacs/21.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Roman Zippel writes: > Hmm, I think it doesn't really fit, it's a bit more than this, e.g. if one > option is set 'm', the other option can still be set to 'm' or 'y'. The > logic is basically "if this option is selected, automatically select this > other option too.", so currently I like "select" best. How about 'assert'? Mike -- I don't need no makeup, I've got real scars -- Tom Waits