From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NTA4s-00025m-4S
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 03:20:14 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NTA4n-00022A-7U
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 03:20:13 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37753 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NTA4m-000223-U7
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 03:20:08 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:63293)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1NTA4m-0002Bk-Ep
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 03:20:08 -0500
Message-ID: <4B46EAAB.2060300@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 09:19:55 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] write option roms in pc-bios/
References: <4B337318.6080901@redhat.com>	<1261664861-15493-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>	<4B463DFC.5040505@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<4B46DF6D.7060306@redhat.com> <4B46E554.7030801@aurel32.net>
In-Reply-To: <4B46E554.7030801@aurel32.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>
Cc: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>

On 01/08/2010 08:57 AM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Paolo Bonzini a =E9crit :
>> On 01/07/2010 09:03 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>> This will wreak havoc on the tree since these are built by default an=
d
>>> they are replacing files in revision control.
>>
>> ... the next question is why are they (linuxboot.bin and multiboot.bin=
)
>> in revision control since they do not require any strange tool to be b=
uilt.
>
> They require an i386 cross compiler, which is not available on all
> installations.

They are being built always anyway now, since their target=20
pc-bios/optionrom/linuxboot.bin does not exist on a checked out tree or=20
even a release tree.  But no one has complained.

Paolo