On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 19:52 +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 27 May 2014 18:53, Sean Bruno wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-05-09 at 12:26 -0500, Stacey Son wrote:
> >> As for restructuring the (25,000+ lines of) patches Sean has agreed
> >> to help with that given that I am busy with some other things at
On 27 May 2014 18:53, Sean Bruno wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-05-09 at 12:26 -0500, Stacey Son wrote:
>> As for restructuring the (25,000+ lines of) patches Sean has agreed
>> to help with that given that I am busy with some other things at the
>> moment.
> Hey folks, Sean here. I'm currently consolida
On Fri, 2014-05-09 at 12:26 -0500, Stacey Son wrote:
> On May 9, 2014, at 4:55 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>
> > On 9 May 2014 09:57, Riku Voipio wrote:
> >> On 8 May 2014 17:54, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >>> Ah, bsd-user. Do you actually use it, or is it just
> >>> in the default compile that you'r
Brad Smith writes:
> On 10/05/14 3:07 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 10/05/2014 08:45, Brad Smith ha scritto:
Having your feature in-tree is a privilege, not a right. You earn it by
helping to maintain it. "it's not really maintained right now" means it
has not been earning
On 10/05/14 3:07 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 10/05/2014 08:45, Brad Smith ha scritto:
Having your feature in-tree is a privilege, not a right. You earn it by
helping to maintain it. "it's not really maintained right now" means it
has not been earning its keep. You're encouraged to remedy tha
On 10 May 2014 08:07, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Why don't you send a patch?
Or just test the one I sent yesterday:
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/347443/
thanks
-- PMM
Il 10/05/2014 08:45, Brad Smith ha scritto:
Having your feature in-tree is a privilege, not a right. You earn it by
helping to maintain it. "it's not really maintained right now" means it
has not been earning its keep. You're encouraged to remedy that.
Huh? "my feature"? I have nothing to d
On 10/05/14 2:25 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
Brad Smith writes:
On 09/05/14 7:35 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 10 May 2014 00:02, Brad Smith wrote:
On 08/05/14 10:54 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
Ah, bsd-user. Do you actually use it, or is it just
in the default compile that you're running?
I
Brad Smith writes:
> On 09/05/14 7:35 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 10 May 2014 00:02, Brad Smith wrote:
>>> On 08/05/14 10:54 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
Ah, bsd-user. Do you actually use it, or is it just
in the default compile that you're running?
>>
>>> I do not use it personally but
On 10 May 2014 00:49, Brad Smith wrote:
> This is just excuses and points out poor project process.
> There could easily be a staging branch to deal with this.
I have no objection if you'd like to sort out our build
and test infrastructure.
thanks
-- PMM
On 09/05/14 7:35 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 10 May 2014 00:02, Brad Smith wrote:
On 08/05/14 10:54 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
Ah, bsd-user. Do you actually use it, or is it just
in the default compile that you're running?
I do not use it personally but it is common sense that commits
must no
On 10 May 2014 00:02, Brad Smith wrote:
> On 08/05/14 10:54 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> Ah, bsd-user. Do you actually use it, or is it just
>> in the default compile that you're running?
> I do not use it personally but it is common sense that commits
> must not be breaking the build.
I generall
On 08/05/14 10:54 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 8 May 2014 15:47, Brad Smith wrote:
The following commit broke the build of QEMU..
linux-user: remove configure option for setting uname release
http://git.qemu.org/?p=qemu.git;a=commit;h=e586822a58b6609edb5ea929e8a4aa394d32389f
http://buildbot.b
On May 9, 2014, at 4:55 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 9 May 2014 09:57, Riku Voipio wrote:
>> On 8 May 2014 17:54, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> Ah, bsd-user. Do you actually use it, or is it just
>>> in the default compile that you're running?
>
>> One year since last bsd-user specific patch, I t
On 9 May 2014 09:57, Riku Voipio wrote:
> On 8 May 2014 17:54, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> Ah, bsd-user. Do you actually use it, or is it just
>> in the default compile that you're running?
> One year since last bsd-user specific patch, I take we need a new
> maintainer for bsd-user?
Perhaps so. S
Hi,
On 8 May 2014 17:54, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 8 May 2014 15:47, Brad Smith wrote:
> > The following commit broke the build of QEMU..
> >
> > linux-user: remove configure option for setting uname release
> >
> >
> http://git.qemu.org/?p=qemu.git;a=commit;h=e586822a58b6609edb5ea929e8a4aa394d
On 8 May 2014 15:47, Brad Smith wrote:
> The following commit broke the build of QEMU..
>
> linux-user: remove configure option for setting uname release
>
> http://git.qemu.org/?p=qemu.git;a=commit;h=e586822a58b6609edb5ea929e8a4aa394d32389f
>
> http://buildbot.b1-systems.de/qemu/builders/default_
The following commit broke the build of QEMU..
linux-user: remove configure option for setting uname release
http://git.qemu.org/?p=qemu.git;a=commit;h=e586822a58b6609edb5ea929e8a4aa394d32389f
http://buildbot.b1-systems.de/qemu/builders/default_openbsd_current/builds/752/steps/compile/logs/stdi
On 16/03/14 11:03 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 16 March 2014 14:33, Brad Smith wrote:
On 16/03/14 9:26 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
Can we limit the set of system headers we're pulling in to
avoid the header where OpenBSD is defining this? Generally
for specific headers that clash it's nicer to jus
On 16 March 2014 14:33, Brad Smith wrote:
> On 16/03/14 9:26 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> Can we limit the set of system headers we're pulling in to
>> avoid the header where OpenBSD is defining this? Generally
>> for specific headers that clash it's nicer to just limit those to
>> whatever file re
On 16/03/14 9:26 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 16 March 2014 13:22, Brad Smith wrote:
Commit 0056ae24bc36798fdd96d0b31e217e9f73896736 broke the build of QEMU and
this affects the 2.0.0 release too.
http://buildbot.b1-systems.de/qemu/builders/default_openbsd_current/builds/700/steps/compile/logs/
On Sun, 2014-03-16 at 13:26 +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 16 March 2014 13:22, Brad Smith wrote:
> > Commit 0056ae24bc36798fdd96d0b31e217e9f73896736 broke the build of QEMU and
> > this affects the 2.0.0 release too.
> >
> > http://buildbot.b1-systems.de/qemu/builders/default_openbsd_current/bu
On 16 March 2014 13:22, Brad Smith wrote:
> Commit 0056ae24bc36798fdd96d0b31e217e9f73896736 broke the build of QEMU and
> this affects the 2.0.0 release too.
>
> http://buildbot.b1-systems.de/qemu/builders/default_openbsd_current/builds/700/steps/compile/logs/stdio
> http://buildbot.b1-systems.de/
Commit 0056ae24bc36798fdd96d0b31e217e9f73896736 broke the build of QEMU
and this affects the 2.0.0 release too.
http://buildbot.b1-systems.de/qemu/builders/default_openbsd_current/builds/700/steps/compile/logs/stdio
http://buildbot.b1-systems.de/qemu/builders/default_openbsd_4.9/builds/891/steps
24 matches
Mail list logo
