> On March 20, 2016, 11:42 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > SConstruct, line 798 > > <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3378/diff/1/?file=54100#file54100line798> > > > > i am surprised to not see this change in util/regress as well > > > > should we parametrise the name rather?
Are you thinking about tests/SConscript maybe? > On March 20, 2016, 11:42 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > SConstruct, line 964 > > <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3378/diff/1/?file=54100#file54100line964> > > > > should we just replace the check for message.h rather? Seems with a recent library version the extra check is no longer needed. - Bjoern A. ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3378/#review8101 ----------------------------------------------------------- On March 15, 2016, 5:01 p.m., Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3378/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated March 15, 2016, 5:01 p.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Repository: gem5 > > > Description > ------- > > scons: make build better on FreeBSD > > Various changes we found needed to build gem5 successfully on > FreeBSD. > > > Diffs > ----- > > SConstruct 2fd64ea0a7cb > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3378/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Bjoern A. Zeeb > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list gem5-dev@gem5.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
