On 08.07.2022 17:39, Luca Fancellu wrote: >> On 24 Jun 2022, at 17:04, Anthony PERARD <anthony.per...@citrix.com> wrote: >> @@ -87,21 +89,21 @@ roms.inc: $(ROMS) >> >> ifneq ($(ROMBIOS_ROM),) >> echo "#ifdef ROM_INCLUDE_ROMBIOS" >> $@.new >> - sh ../../misc/mkhex rombios $(ROMBIOS_ROM) >> $@.new >> + $(SHELL) $(XEN_ROOT)/tools/misc/mkhex rombios $(ROMBIOS_ROM) >> $@.new >> echo "#endif" >> $@.new >> endif >> >> ifneq ($(STDVGA_ROM),) >> echo "#ifdef ROM_INCLUDE_VGABIOS" >> $@.new >> - sh ../../misc/mkhex vgabios_stdvga $(STDVGA_ROM) >> $@.new >> + $(SHELL) $(XEN_ROOT)/tools/misc/mkhex vgabios_stdvga $(STDVGA_ROM) >> >> $@.new >> echo "#endif" >> $@.new >> endif >> ifneq ($(CIRRUSVGA_ROM),) >> echo "#ifdef ROM_INCLUDE_VGABIOS" >> $@.new >> - sh ../../misc/mkhex vgabios_cirrusvga $(CIRRUSVGA_ROM) >> $@.new >> + $(SHELL) $(XEN_ROOT)/tools/misc/mkhex vgabios_cirrusvga >> $(CIRRUSVGA_ROM) >> $@.new >> echo "#endif" >> $@.new >> endif >> - mv $@.new $@ >> + mv -f $@.new $@ > > Here, instead of -f, is it safer -u? What’s your opinion on that? The patch > looks good to me.
Would -u be an option to use in the first place? It's not a standard option to mv, afaict. Jan
