From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=59517 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OOUyw-0005Rr-Bi for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:11:12 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OOUyr-0000Wn-AH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:11:06 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33458) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OOUyr-0000WY-2X for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:11:01 -0400 Received: from int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.21]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o5FCAxPw020339 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:10:59 -0400 Message-ID: <4C176DD1.2010605@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:10:57 +0200 From: Jes Sorensen MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1276599879-22749-1-git-send-email-Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com> <4C176C3D.5020103@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4C176C3D.5020103@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/7] Fix building qemu-kvm for non KVM target List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Avi Kivity Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 06/15/10 14:04, Avi Kivity wrote: > It's the other way round. Upstream keeps moving stuff out of > Makefile.target, and I move them back during merges, because the only > thing I can think of during a merge is "how quickly can I complete this > merge". > > Thanks for tackling this. I see. I found at least some of the cases I was tackling was because things had moved from .objs to .target because of the TARGET_I386 checks. Trying to use TARGET_I386 in a file that is listed in Makefile.objs causes nasty warnings. I would very much like it if we can be more strict not allowing such changes without a very strong reason in the future :) Part of the problem is of course that there are no easy ways to check for the presence of say HPET since we don't have CONFIG_HPET so TARGET_I386 becomes the easy way :( Cheers, Jes