[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87mw41aqbc.fsf@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 11:02:31 +0000
From: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>
To: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
"kvm\@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@....com>,
Asias He <asias.hejun@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Ronald Minnich <rminnich@...gle.com>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
"kvmarm\@lists.cs.columbia.edu" <kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu>,
"linux-arm-kernel\@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: stand-alone kvmtool
Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com> writes:
> Hi Will,
>
> On 18/02/15 15:50, Will Deacon wrote:
>> Hi Andre,
>>
>> Thanks for doing this. Since it looks unlikely that kvmtool will ever be
>> merged back into the kernel tree, it makes sense to cut the dependency
>> in my opinion.
>>
<snip>
>
> P.S. Although both approaches still provide the kvmtool patch history,
> they do not compile before the dependency cut patches. If that is an
> issue, one could think about injecting those new patches back into the
> repository time line. Admittedly that sounds scary, but would solve the
> problem.
If you can have it all it would be nice to preserve buildability all
through your history for bisecting (and the moon on a stick please ;-)
Is the dependency on the kernel sources something that has been stable
over the projects history or something that's been declining/increasing
over time?
--
Alex Bennée
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists