On 17.04.2020 16:42, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 03:39:48PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 17.04.2020 15:19, Anthony PERARD wrote:
>>> Or do you mean keeping exception to the rule? And hope that when someone
>>> changes the rule, it doesn't forget to check if the exception need
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 03:39:48PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 17.04.2020 15:19, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> > Or do you mean keeping exception to the rule? And hope that when someone
> > changes the rule, it doesn't forget to check if the exception needs
> > changing as well?
>
> ... "exception" l
On 17.04.2020 15:19, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 09:12:11AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 16.04.2020 17:09, Anthony PERARD wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 04:22:05PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.04.2020 14:44, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 02:5
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 09:12:11AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 16.04.2020 17:09, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 04:22:05PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 16.04.2020 14:44, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 02:54:35PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 31.
On 16.04.2020 17:09, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 04:22:05PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 16.04.2020 14:44, Anthony PERARD wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 02:54:35PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 31.03.2020 12:30, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> We want to use the same rune
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 04:22:05PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 16.04.2020 14:44, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 02:54:35PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 31.03.2020 12:30, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> >>> We want to use the same rune to build mm/*/guest_*.o as the one use to
> >
On 16.04.2020 14:44, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 02:54:35PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 31.03.2020 12:30, Anthony PERARD wrote:
>>> We want to use the same rune to build mm/*/guest_*.o as the one use to
>>> build every other *.o object. The consequence it that file symbols t
On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 02:54:35PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 31.03.2020 12:30, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> > We want to use the same rune to build mm/*/guest_*.o as the one use to
> > build every other *.o object. The consequence it that file symbols that
> > the program ./symbols prefer changes w
On 31.03.2020 12:30, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> We want to use the same rune to build mm/*/guest_*.o as the one use to
> build every other *.o object. The consequence it that file symbols that
> the program ./symbols prefer changes with CONFIG_ENFORCE_UNIQUE_SYMBOLS=y.
>
> (1) Currently we have those
We want to use the same rune to build mm/*/guest_*.o as the one use to
build every other *.o object. The consequence it that file symbols that
the program ./symbols prefer changes with CONFIG_ENFORCE_UNIQUE_SYMBOLS=y.
(1) Currently we have those two file symbols:
guest_walk.c
guest_walk_2.
10 matches
Mail list logo