On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 02:49:04PM +0000, Antti Kantee wrote: > On 29/09/15 14:40, Wei Liu wrote: > >I didn't expect to be able to link ARM object to x86 stack. I was > >talking more about what is the good practice to decide whether I should > >put an object in my customised conf or explicitly link it against my > >application code in my main build system. > > > >For example, in my current code, I use rune like (in old syntax) > > > > ./rumpbake -c customised_conf xen_pv_qemu init_obj app_obj > > > >init_obj is an object that contains code to bring up the platform to a > >specific state. > > > >With the new syntax, I guess you're advocating I put init_obj in > >customised_conf. > > All input files passed to rumpbake are expected to be "programs", i.e. > contain main(). Everything in the config file is expected to be a "systems > component" (global, if you want to think of it that way). I'll admit, my
Right, "system component" is what I meant by "quasi rumpkern obj". Good to know the official term! > formulation is not very precise, but I think you understand what I mean. Yes. Now I really understand what you mean. Wei.
