From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pascal de Bruijn Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2019 15:20:59 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/linux-tools: add support for Hyper-V tools In-Reply-To: <20191206151712.4a3ea674@windsurf> Message-ID: <3683881315-31837@mail.unilogic.nl> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net From: Thomas Petazzoni To: Simon Rowe Cc: Simon Rowe , , Yann E. MORIN , Pascal de Bruijn Sent: 12/6/2019 3:17 PM Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/linux-tools: add support for Hyper-V tools Hello, +Pascal in Cc. On Fri, 6 Dec 2019 13:33:50 +0000 Simon Rowe wrote: > What's the probability of that, someone else just sent a patch 15 > minutes ago while I was testing this one, Pascal: the approach of Simon is to have a single option to build/install all tools. Do we really need one option per tool like you implemented? In which use cases would only a subset of the tools be needed? What is the installed size of each tool? The size of each tool is very limited, so that's at best a secondary concern. But for example the fcopy service basically gives the virtualization host provider direct access to the guest filesystem., which is not something everybody may want to actively facilitate. Having these different services nicely separated out, is specifically one of the nice things opposed to VMware's openvmtools/vmtoolsd. Regards, Pascal de Bruijn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: