Add back xen-devel
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 05:26:12PM +0100, Juergen Schinker wrote:
>
>
> - On 13 Oct, 2016, at 14:53, Wei Liu wei.l...@citrix.com wrote:
>
> > Hmm... I think no amount of hand-holding is going to help you.
> >
> > In your situation I would suggest you to use various tools
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 11:02:09AM +0100, Juergen Schinker wrote:
>
>
> - On 13 Oct, 2016, at 09:29, Wei Liu wei.l...@citrix.com wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 10:10:46AM +0100, Juergen Schinker wrote:
> >> Right and still no solution
> >>
> >> there is no xz-dev or libxz-dev; I inst
- On 13 Oct, 2016, at 09:29, Wei Liu wei.l...@citrix.com wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 10:10:46AM +0100, Juergen Schinker wrote:
>> Right and still no solution
>>
>> there is no xz-dev or libxz-dev; I installed everything which just looks
>> remote
>> like xz or lzma
>>
>
> On Debian
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 10:04:11AM +0100, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 05:03:11PM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> > On 10/12/2016 05:27 AM, Wei Liu wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 08:31:31PM +0100, Juergen Schinker wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> We're going to tag rc2 some time this week.
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 10:10:46AM +0100, Juergen Schinker wrote:
> Right and still no solution
>
> there is no xz-dev or libxz-dev; I installed everything which just looks
> remote like xz or lzma
>
On Debian it is called liblzma-dev. Not sure what distro you use.
> building is no problem a
Right and still no solution
there is no xz-dev or libxz-dev; I installed everything which just looks
remote like xz or lzma
building is no problem as I build with
./configure --enable-githttp --enable-systemd --disable-rombios
--disable-qemu-traditional --disable-stubdom --disable-docs
I'm
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 05:03:11PM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 10/12/2016 05:27 AM, Wei Liu wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 08:31:31PM +0100, Juergen Schinker wrote:
> >>
> >>> We're going to tag rc2 some time this week. Thanks for help testing Xen!
> >>>
> >>> Wei.
> >>>
> J
> >>>
On 10/12/2016 05:27 AM, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 08:31:31PM +0100, Juergen Schinker wrote:
>>
>>> We're going to tag rc2 some time this week. Thanks for help testing Xen!
>>>
>>> Wei.
>>>
J
- On 11 Oct, 2016, at 09:37, Wei Liu wei.l...@citrix.com wrote:
>>>
Wei Liu writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to newer commit
[and 1 more messages]"):
> FAOD, I consider this sub-thread for "what should we do for stable
> versions of Xen". This is orthogonal to whether we should upgrade our
> in-tree ipxe versi
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:00:56PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ian Jackson writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to newer
> commit"):
> > That was eventually done. I'm not sure exactly when the change was
> > made. Does gcc -Wno-foo work proper
On 10/12/2016 07:00 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ian Jackson writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to newer
> commit"):
>> That was eventually done. I'm not sure exactly when the change was
>> made. Does gcc -Wno-foo work properly on all the gc
Ian Jackson writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to newer
commit"):
> That was eventually done. I'm not sure exactly when the change was
> made. Does gcc -Wno-foo work properly on all the gcc's we care about ?
Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [Xen-deve
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 08:31:31PM +0100, Juergen Schinker wrote:
>
>
> >
> > We're going to tag rc2 some time this week. Thanks for help testing Xen!
> >
> > Wei.
> >
> >> J
> >>
> >> - On 11 Oct, 2016, at 09:37, Wei Liu wei.l...@citrix.com wrote:
> >>
> >> > No, you can try to work ar
>>> On 11.10.16 at 23:11, wrote:
> On 11/10/2016 14:32, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> Boris Ostrovsky writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to
>> newer commit"):
>>> BTW, another option for backporting may be removing -Werror. If we know
&g
>>> On 11.10.16 at 16:27, wrote:
> On 10/11/2016 09:32 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> Boris Ostrovsky writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to
> newer commit"):
>>> On 10/11/2016 05:52 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
>>>> Maybe we c
On 11/10/2016 22:11, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>
>>> Another interesting new warning that is fatal with -Werror is
>>> if(a)
>>> foo();
>>> bar();
>>>
>>> gcc warns that bar() is indented and maybe braces are needed.
>> Do we actually have cases like this ?
> Yes
>
>> Are they real
On 11/10/2016 14:32, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Boris Ostrovsky writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to
> newer commit"):
>> On 10/11/2016 05:52 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
>>> Maybe we could consider these as backports to earlier releases.
>>> Howe
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 08:31:31PM +0100, Juergen Schinker wrote:
>
>
> >
> > We're going to tag rc2 some time this week. Thanks for help testing Xen!
> >
> > Wei.
> >
> >> J
> >>
> >> - On 11 Oct, 2016, at 09:37, Wei Liu wei.l...@citrix.com wrote:
> >>
> >> > No, you can try to work ar
>
> We're going to tag rc2 some time this week. Thanks for help testing Xen!
>
> Wei.
>
>> J
>>
>> - On 11 Oct, 2016, at 09:37, Wei Liu wei.l...@citrix.com wrote:
>>
>> > No, you can try to work around this issue by appending --disable-rombios
>> > to your ./configure invocation. You ca
On 10/11/2016 10:54 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Boris Ostrovsky writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to
> newer commit"):
>> We could but what if an old compiler doesn't support that option?
>> Although it looks like -Wno-, which is what we'd us
Boris Ostrovsky writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to newer
commit"):
> We could but what if an old compiler doesn't support that option?
> Although it looks like -Wno-, which is what we'd use, may be OK:
>
> ostr@workbase> gcc foo.c
>
On 10/11/2016 09:32 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Boris Ostrovsky writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to
> newer commit"):
>> On 10/11/2016 05:52 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
>>> Maybe we could consider these as backports to earlier releases.
>>&g
Boris Ostrovsky writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to newer
commit"):
> On 10/11/2016 05:52 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Maybe we could consider these as backports to earlier releases.
> > However, I looked at the patch and it mostly seems to be removin
On 10/11/2016 05:52 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Boris Ostrovsky writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to
> newer commit"):
>> On 10/10/2016 12:33 PM, Wei Liu wrote:
>>> Sure. I will check ipxe mailing list in one week.
>> FWIW, here is the patc
Boris Ostrovsky writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to newer
commit"):
> On 10/10/2016 12:33 PM, Wei Liu wrote:
> > Sure. I will check ipxe mailing list in one week.
>
> FWIW, here is the patch that I used to pacify gcc.
Thanks. I don't think we
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:42:21AM +0100, Juergen Schinker wrote:
>
> yeah I got it compilin' with the patch from Boris and made a deb
>
> but this is only useful on other machines...
>
> However booting with xen-4.8-rc1 works fine but the xen-tools didn't work ,
> so booting a given guest was
yeah I got it compilin' with the patch from Boris and made a deb
but this is only useful on other machines...
However booting with xen-4.8-rc1 works fine but the xen-tools didn't work , so
booting a given guest was not possible
i even had live-patching enabled yay
will try again Friday with r
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 01:38:48PM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 10/10/2016 12:33 PM, Wei Liu wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 04:51:13PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> >> Wei Liu writes ("Re: [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to newer commit"):
> >>> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 04:34:31PM +0100, Ian Ja
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 07:28:22PM +0100, Juergen Schinker wrote:
>
> and where have you applied that patch ? is it xen-4.8-rc1 ?
>
> do I have to apply that patch ?
>
> do I need to check out another tag ?
>
> do I have to wait a week?
>
No, you can try to work around this issue by appending
and where have you applied that patch ? is it xen-4.8-rc1 ?
do I have to apply that patch ?
do I need to check out another tag ?
do I have to wait a week?
- On 10 Oct, 2016, at 16:33, Wei Liu wei.l...@citrix.com wrote:
> Sure. I will check ipxe mailing list in one week.
>
> Wei.
___
On 10/10/2016 12:33 PM, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 04:51:13PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> Wei Liu writes ("Re: [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to newer commit"):
>>> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 04:34:31PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
How did you choose 827dd1bfee67daa683935ce65316f7e0f057
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 04:51:13PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Wei Liu writes ("Re: [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to newer commit"):
> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 04:34:31PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > How did you choose 827dd1bfee67daa683935ce65316f7e0f057fe1c ?
> >
> > That's the latest commit
Wei Liu writes ("Re: [PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to newer commit"):
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 04:34:31PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > How did you choose 827dd1bfee67daa683935ce65316f7e0f057fe1c ?
>
> That's the latest commit -- since upstream wants us to always use the
> latest, I just picked th
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 04:34:31PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Wei Liu writes ("[PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to newer commit"):
> > The current commit in tree is rather old. It has come to a point that
> > cherry-picking commits from upstream isn't trivial anymore.
> >
> > There is long term plan
Wei Liu writes ("[PATCH for-4.8] ipxe: update to newer commit"):
> The current commit in tree is rather old. It has come to a point that
> cherry-picking commits from upstream isn't trivial anymore.
>
> There is long term plan to track ipxe upstream, but for 4.8 release, we
> should just update ip
35 matches
Mail list logo
