From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Antti Kantee Subject: Re: make c-stubdom returns No rule to make target `mini-os-x86_64-c' Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 13:02:53 +0000 Message-ID: <552FB2FD.8030700@iki.fi> References: <5ED6894E-03C2-4B69-B8DB-80DD288FD034@supercoders.com.au> <20150416091033.GA13154@zion.uk.xensource.com> <21CFC4F5-6A8B-4193-AA75-0D479654326C@supercoders.com.au> <20150416101744.GC13154@zion.uk.xensource.com> <1429179829.25195.61.camel@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1429179829.25195.61.camel@citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Campbell , Wei Liu Cc: Andrew Stuart , xen-devel@lists.xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 16/04/15 10:23, Ian Campbell wrote: > But I think we can safely(?) say that work done on rumpkernel will be a > more worthwhile investment, while work on stubdom would be more of a > sunk cost... I can't speak for "stubdom", but I sure hope that work done on rump kernels is a worthwhile investment ;) One thing I'd like to note, though. While we certainly welcome users and contributors already, until someone manages to get around to whacking the build system enough to support an "install toolchain" feature, it is unclear which bits in the build directory are meant to remain stable and which ones just happened to be there at $t. If someone wants to build systems and wants to depend on feature $x remaining to be present, for now it's better to ask on the list. http://wiki.rumpkernel.org/Info:-Community - antti