On 15/10/2019 10.27, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Sat, Oct 05, 2019 at 02:33:34PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: >> On Sat, 5 Oct 2019 at 11:21, Lucien Murray-Pitts >> <lucienmp.q...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Whilst working on a m68k patch I noticed that the capstone in use >>> today (3.0) doesnt support the M68K and thus a hand turned disasm >>> function is used. >>> >>> The newer capstone (5.0) appears to support a few more CPU, inc. m68k. >>> >>> Why we move to this newer capstone? >> >> Moving to a newer capstone sounds like a good idea. The only >> reason we haven't moved forward as far as I'm aware is that >> nobody has done the work to send a patch to do that move >> forward to the newer version. Richard Henderson would >> probably know if there was any other blocker. > > Bearing in mind our distro support policy, we need to continue to > support 3.0 series of capstone for a while yet based on what I > see in various distros. eg Ubuntu 18.04 LTS has 3.0.4, as does > Fedora 29. Version 4.0 is only in a few very new distros: > > https://repology.org/project/capstone/versions > > We can of course use features from newer capstone, *provided* we correctly > do conditional compilation so that we can still build against 3.0 series > on distros that have that version.
We're embedding the capstone submodule in the release tarballs, so I think we're independent from the distro release, aren't we? So this should not be an issue, as far as I can see. Thomas
