On Wednesday, 27.05.2015 at 09:45, Antti Kantee wrote: > Does that statement mean that you have working code or you played > around with it in your head? You read like an academic paper where > one can never be quite sure if they're describing something that > works or works on paper ;)
Working on the code now... > Looks generally good. > > Why do you need i686 for the -T argument to rumpbake? Did you mean > e.g. hw-generic instead? It should be -T i686-hw-generic. The CPU is in there just as a safeguard so that the user doesn't try to rumpbake a binary built for x86_64 to an i686 target. > I assume there will be something like "rumpbake -T list". How does > one add targets? .rumpbakerc? -c rumpbakelist? > > How are multiple programs handled? You probably give multiple > binaries to rumpbake, but then how do you decide in which order they > run? That's probably a rumprun thing, but how do you remember which > "executables" have been baked? > > Where is the configuration file handled? No idea yet. Will try and get something minimal working first.
