From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MEVvV-0000pB-7i for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:05:45 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MEVvT-0000oI-5C for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:05:43 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=38878 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MEVvT-0000oB-08 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:05:43 -0400 Received: from naru.obs2.net ([84.20.150.76]:56699) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MEVvS-0007nr-9w for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:05:42 -0400 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 01:05:40 +0300 From: Riku Voipio Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] check for utimensat() availability on configure Message-ID: <20090610220540.GE23525@kos.to> References: <1244582792-30589-1-git-send-email-ehabkost@redhat.com> <1244582792-30589-3-git-send-email-ehabkost@redhat.com> <87ocsxoye4.fsf@lechat.rtp-net.org> <20090610141255.GZ18045@blackpad> <20090610160742.GB12221@kos.to> <20090610162047.GA7776@poweredge.glommer> <874ouonj9i.fsf@lechat.rtp-net.org> <20090610165640.GC7776@poweredge.glommer> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090610165640.GC7776@poweredge.glommer> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Glauber Costa Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 01:56:40PM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote: > > >> because mainline qemu is lacking a linux-user maintainer. > > > I believe if you can guarantee (through proper testing) the stability of maemo > > > tree, and poke for review the specific parts that may affect the rest ot the world, > > > then it should be fine to just pull it. > > At least, this would be better than what we have currently. Please note > > also that "proper testing" is hard imho. It depends also on host/guest > > systems used to test. > it is hard for everybody, not just qemu user. Since you guys are the main > user of it, if you are happy with the state of things, and it is isolated enough from > the rest of qemu not to break it very frequently, we should be fine. Generally we use tests from ltp testsuite since they have nice tests for most syscalls. However, the testing is not quite systematic, an particularry combinations of host/target glibc appear to create a mess.. That said, the changes are highly contained under linux-user/, in the current tree there is only one patch (GUEST_BASE support) that touches outside parts. > > Having an "official" maintainer means having someone being able to give > > his final word if people disagree on how to fix a bug. > One of you should step up and do it. If nobody objects, I can.