On Thu, 2016-01-07 at 15:36 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> endif
> -OVMF_UPSTREAM_REVISION ?= cb9a7ebabcd6b8a49dc0854b2f9592d732b5afbd
> +OVMF_UPSTREAM_REVISION ?= af9785a9ed61daea52b47f0bf448f1f228beee1e
This should be:
OVMF_UPSTREAM_REVISION ?= 52a99493cce88a9d4ec8a02d7f1bd1a1001ce60d
You've pic
Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] OVMF related osstest failures on multiple
branches"):
> [Ian Jackson:]
> > So I would be tempted to just update the Config.mk reference in stable
> > trees.
>
> That's my inclination too.
Let's give it another day to
On Wed, 2016-01-06 at 16:28 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] OVMF related osstest failures on
> multiple branches"):
> > On 06.01.16 at 16:28, wrote:
> > > Running xen-4.6-testing with ovmf.git 52a99493cce8 instead of
> > &
On Wed, Jan 06, 2016 at 03:28:30PM +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> (Adding Wei and Jan who I should have included before, thread starts at
> http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-01/msg00442.html )
>
> On Wed, 2016-01-06 at 14:27 +, Ian Campbell wrote:
>
>
> > Next step is I
Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] OVMF related osstest failures on multiple
branches"):
> On 06.01.16 at 16:28, wrote:
> > Running xen-4.6-testing with ovmf.git 52a99493cce8 instead of cb9a7ebabcd6
> > does seem to have worked (i.e. the flight hasn't actual
>>> On 06.01.16 at 16:28, wrote:
> Running xen-4.6-testing with ovmf.git 52a99493cce8 instead of cb9a7ebabcd6
> does seem to have worked (i.e. the flight hasn't actually finished yet but
> it has passed the debian-hvm-install step).
>
> We have in the past, after much discussion[0], backported ch
(Adding Wei and Jan who I should have included before, thread starts at
http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-01/msg00442.html )
On Wed, 2016-01-06 at 14:27 +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> Next step is I'm trying 4.6-testing with the newer OVMF to see if this is
> worth pursuing
On Wed, 2016-01-06 at 12:35 +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> The fly in the ointment of this theory is that the Jessie upgrade doesn't
> seem to have broken unstable in this way, for some reason, which is what I
> intend to investigate first.
One difference between all the failing versions and xen-uns
