On 10/23/24 12:51 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 22/10/2024 22.12, Jared Rossi wrote:
On 10/22/24 1:36 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 20/10/2024 03.29, jro...@linux.ibm.com wrote:
From: Jared Rossi
We are already using the libc from SLOF for the s390-netboot.img, and
this libc implementation is w
On 22/10/2024 22.12, Jared Rossi wrote:
On 10/22/24 1:36 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 20/10/2024 03.29, jro...@linux.ibm.com wrote:
From: Jared Rossi
We are already using the libc from SLOF for the s390-netboot.img, and
this libc implementation is way more complete and accurate than the
simple
On 10/22/24 1:36 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 20/10/2024 03.29, jro...@linux.ibm.com wrote:
From: Jared Rossi
We are already using the libc from SLOF for the s390-netboot.img, and
this libc implementation is way more complete and accurate than the
simple implementation that we currently use fo
On 20/10/2024 03.29, jro...@linux.ibm.com wrote:
From: Jared Rossi
We are already using the libc from SLOF for the s390-netboot.img, and
this libc implementation is way more complete and accurate than the
simple implementation that we currently use for the s390-ccw.img binary.
Since we are now
From: Jared Rossi
We are already using the libc from SLOF for the s390-netboot.img, and
this libc implementation is way more complete and accurate than the
simple implementation that we currently use for the s390-ccw.img binary.
Since we are now always assuming that the SLOF submodule is availabl
