| Message ID | 530FB326.9080602@redhat.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 27 February 2014 21:50, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: > Il 27/02/2014 20:57, Stefan Weil ha scritto: >> Yes. I saw that problem, too. This patch for Makefile fixed it for me: >> >> index ccab967,a28a3c8..8ec3a99 >> @@@ -170,6 -159,6 +170,7 @@@ qemu-options.def: $(SRC_PATH)/qemu-opti >> SUBDIR_RULES=$(patsubst %,subdir-%, $(TARGET_DIRS)) >> SOFTMMU_SUBDIR_RULES=$(filter %-softmmu,$(SUBDIR_RULES)) >> >> ++$(SOFTMMU_SUBDIR_RULES): $(block-obj-y) >> $(SOFTMMU_SUBDIR_RULES): config-all-devices.mak > > This is correct. Alternatively: Can you either post that to the list as a proper patch or alternatively just add a reviewed-by tag to the patch Stefan sent earlier, depending which you think is the better fix? Then I'll apply it... thanks -- PMM
Il 27/02/2014 23:17, Peter Maydell ha scritto: > On 27 February 2014 21:50, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: >> Il 27/02/2014 20:57, Stefan Weil ha scritto: >>> Yes. I saw that problem, too. This patch for Makefile fixed it for me: >>> >>> index ccab967,a28a3c8..8ec3a99 >>> @@@ -170,6 -159,6 +170,7 @@@ qemu-options.def: $(SRC_PATH)/qemu-opti >>> SUBDIR_RULES=$(patsubst %,subdir-%, $(TARGET_DIRS)) >>> SOFTMMU_SUBDIR_RULES=$(filter %-softmmu,$(SUBDIR_RULES)) >>> >>> ++$(SOFTMMU_SUBDIR_RULES): $(block-obj-y) >>> $(SOFTMMU_SUBDIR_RULES): config-all-devices.mak >> >> This is correct. Alternatively: > > Can you either post that to the list as a proper patch or alternatively > just add a reviewed-by tag to the patch Stefan sent earlier, depending > which you think is the better fix? Then I'll apply it... Done, thanks. Can you apply also Fam's patch http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/258469/raw ? Paolo
On 27 February 2014 22:23, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: > Can you apply also Fam's patch > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/258469/raw > > ? Sure. I'd misread Markus' reply as being opposed to it, but rereading I see he was just making a suggestion for the future. thanks -- PMM
On 27 February 2014 22:17, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote: > Can you either post that to the list as a proper patch or alternatively > just add a reviewed-by tag to the patch Stefan sent earlier, depending > which you think is the better fix? Then I'll apply it... Do we have a definite version of this fix which everybody is happy with yet? I've got confused with the various versions and review comments on them. I'd like to apply the buildfix before I apply any further pull requests... thanks -- PMM
Am 04.03.2014 00:50, schrieb Peter Maydell: > > Do we have a definite version of this fix which everybody is happy > with yet? I've got confused with the various versions and review > comments on them. I'd like to apply the buildfix before I apply > any further pull requests... > > thanks > -- PMM Simply take the version without confusing review comments: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/324909/. :-) To be honest: the other patch fixes one build regression and introduces a new one, so it would not improve the situation. Paolo noticed that Makefile is a mess in some parts, and I agree. But that is something which can be handled separately. Regards Stefan
Il 04/03/2014 07:57, Stefan Weil ha scritto: > Simply take the version without confusing review comments: > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/324909/. :-) > > To be honest: the other patch fixes one build regression and introduces > a new one, so it would not improve the situation. > > Paolo noticed that Makefile is a mess in some parts, and I agree. But > that is something which can be handled separately. Agree. Paolo
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index a443cd4..3938b6c 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -167,7 +167,7 @@ subdir-dtc:dtc/libfdt dtc/tests dtc/%: mkdir -p $@ -$(SUBDIR_RULES): libqemuutil.a libqemustub.a $(common-obj-y) +$(SUBDIR_RULES): libqemuutil.a libqemustub.a $(common-obj-y) $(block-obj-y) ROMSUBDIR_RULES=$(patsubst %,romsubdir-%, $(ROMS)) romsubdir-%: