> On Aug 26, 2020, at 8:41 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> On 25.08.2020 12:37, George Dunlap wrote:
>> As an explanation, there are a combination of things. You proposed A (remove
>> the dependency), Ian proposed B (use move-if-changed), but we’re hoping to
>> do C (have an external tree) before
On 26.08.2020 12:33, George Dunlap wrote:
>
>
>> On Aug 26, 2020, at 8:41 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>
>> On 25.08.2020 12:37, George Dunlap wrote:
>>> As an explanation, there are a combination of things. You proposed A
>>> (remove the dependency), Ian proposed B (use move-if-changed), but we’re
On 25.08.2020 12:37, George Dunlap wrote:
> As an explanation, there are a combination of things. You proposed A (remove
> the dependency), Ian proposed B (use move-if-changed), but we’re hoping to do
> C (have an external tree) before the next release. I haven’t had the time to
> look into
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 10:37:09AM +, George Dunlap wrote:
>
>
> > On Aug 25, 2020, at 7:47 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > On 24.08.2020 16:58, Nick Rosbrook wrote:
> >> My understanding was that you were going to use move-if-changed to fix
> >> this for now (it seemed everyone agreed this
> On Aug 25, 2020, at 7:47 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> On 24.08.2020 16:58, Nick Rosbrook wrote:
>> My understanding was that you were going to use move-if-changed to fix
>> this for now (it seemed everyone agreed this was the quickest short-term
>> fix).
>
> A technical and a non-technical
On 24.08.2020 16:58, Nick Rosbrook wrote:
> My understanding was that you were going to use move-if-changed to fix
> this for now (it seemed everyone agreed this was the quickest short-term fix).
A technical and a non-technical remark:
Thinking about this some more, I'm no longer convinced the
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 03:11:41PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 04.08.2020 18:41, Nick Rosbrook wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 12:02 PM Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>
> >> On 04.08.2020 17:57, Wei Liu wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 05:53:49PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 04.08.2020
On 04.08.2020 18:41, Nick Rosbrook wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 12:02 PM Jan Beulich wrote:
>>
>> On 04.08.2020 17:57, Wei Liu wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 05:53:49PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 04.08.2020 17:50, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 05:30:40PM +0200, Jan
> On Aug 5, 2020, at 10:55 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
>
> Nick Rosbrook writes ("Re: [PATCH] libxl: avoid golang building without
> CONFIG_GOLANG=y"):
>> Jan - is the problem specifically that a fresh clone, or `git
>> checkout`, etc. changes file time
Nick Rosbrook writes ("Re: [PATCH] libxl: avoid golang building without
CONFIG_GOLANG=y"):
> Jan - is the problem specifically that a fresh clone, or `git
> checkout`, etc. changes file timestamps in a way that triggers make to
> rebuild those targets? I have not used
On 04.08.2020 18:41, Nick Rosbrook wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 12:02 PM Jan Beulich wrote:
>>
>> On 04.08.2020 17:57, Wei Liu wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 05:53:49PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 04.08.2020 17:50, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 05:30:40PM +0200, Jan
On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 12:02 PM Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> On 04.08.2020 17:57, Wei Liu wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 05:53:49PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 04.08.2020 17:50, Wei Liu wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 05:30:40PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 04.08.2020 17:22, Nick
On 04.08.2020 17:57, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 05:53:49PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 04.08.2020 17:50, Wei Liu wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 05:30:40PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 04.08.2020 17:22, Nick Rosbrook wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 10:17 AM Wei Liu
On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 05:53:49PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 04.08.2020 17:50, Wei Liu wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 05:30:40PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 04.08.2020 17:22, Nick Rosbrook wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 10:17 AM Wei Liu wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 03,
On 04.08.2020 17:50, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 05:30:40PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 04.08.2020 17:22, Nick Rosbrook wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 10:17 AM Wei Liu wrote:
On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 10:06:32AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> While this doesn't
On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 05:30:40PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 04.08.2020 17:22, Nick Rosbrook wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 10:17 AM Wei Liu wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 10:06:32AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> While this doesn't address the real problem I've run into
On 04.08.2020 17:22, Nick Rosbrook wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 10:17 AM Wei Liu wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 10:06:32AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> While this doesn't address the real problem I've run into (attempting to
>>> update r/o source files), not recursing into
On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 10:17 AM Wei Liu wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 10:06:32AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > While this doesn't address the real problem I've run into (attempting to
> > update r/o source files), not recursing into tools/golang/xenlight/ is
> > enough to fix the build for
On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 10:06:32AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> While this doesn't address the real problem I've run into (attempting to
> update r/o source files), not recursing into tools/golang/xenlight/ is
> enough to fix the build for me for the moment. I don't currently see why
> 60db5da62ac0
While this doesn't address the real problem I've run into (attempting to
update r/o source files), not recursing into tools/golang/xenlight/ is
enough to fix the build for me for the moment. I don't currently see why
60db5da62ac0 ("libxl: Generate golang bindings in libxl Makefile") found
it
20 matches
Mail list logo
