From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix ia64 tools build Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 14:12:21 +0100 Message-ID: <1288357941.13236.212.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Keir Fraser Cc: KUWAMURA Shin'ya , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 08:55 +0100, Keir Fraser wrote: > On 29/10/2010 08:39, "KUWAMURA Shin'ya" wrote: > > > Ping? > > > > This patch is still required for ia64 tools. > > > > Best regards, > > I think it would ne neater to have your own > tools/libxc/ia64/ac_ia64_tools.h, and then conditionally include that from > Xen's acenv.h (e.g., dependent on __XEN_TOOLS__). Or revert the bits of c/s > 22066 that broke the ia64 build in the first place -- possibly the changes > were based on a false assumption? Yeah, I thought it was unused. I may have confused it with tools/libxc/ia64/acpi/platform/aclinux.h which is in fact just a symlink to xen/include/acpi/platform/aclinux.h. Note that tools/libxc is now licensed as LGPL so before simply reinstating the old file it probably needs to be confirmed that it is ok to license that way. (that said the contents of the file don't seem particularly exciting, a cleanroom rewrite based on compiling and observing the errors would be pretty trivial) > Cc'ing the author of that patch, Ian > Campbell. In any case, ifdef'ing the bulk of aclinux.h is just gross, I > don't like that fix. Why do we even need what appears to be a simplistic OS abstraction layer in the tools first place? Ian.