Yes, I guess xget is much more stable than xbootfs, no point of still
having both.
Thanks,
Lucho
On Sep 8, 2008, at 10:27 AM, Hugh Greenberg wrote:
This looks good too. Should we maybe get rid of xbootfs? xget is
xbootfs with some additional features.
On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 10:28 -0600, Abhishek Kulkarni wrote:
Two more minor patches clunked together -
PATCH 1/2 : Add xget target to the xcpu Makefile
PATCH 2/2 : Add xget.static target to the xget Makefile
Signed-off-by: Abhishek Kulkarni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: Makefile
===================================================================
--- Makefile (revision 685)
+++ Makefile (working copy)
@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@
make -C xbootfs clean
make -C statfs clean
make -C utils clean
+ make -C xget clean
install:
make -C libspfs install
@@ -46,6 +47,7 @@
make -C xbootfs install
make -C statfs install
make -C utils install
+ make -C xget install
installman:
mkdir -p $(INSTALLPREFIX)/share/man/man1
@@ -72,6 +74,7 @@
make -C xbootfs
make -C statfs
make -C utils
+ make -C xget
xbootfs: libs
make -C xbootfs
@@ -84,3 +87,6 @@
statfs: libs
make -C statfs
+
+xget: libs
+ make -C xget
Index: Makefile
===================================================================
--- Makefile (revision 685)
+++ Makefile (working copy)
@@ -15,6 +15,9 @@
xget: $(OFILES) $(HFILES) Makefile
$(CC) -o xget $(CFLAGS) $(OFILES) $(LFLAGS)
+xget.static: $(OFILES) $(HFILES) Makefile
+ $(CC) -static -o xget.static $(CFLAGS) $(OFILES) $(LFLAGS) -
lm
+
install:
mkdir -p $(INSTALLPREFIX)/sbin
for i in $(CMD) ; do cp $$i $(INSTALLPREFIX)/sbin ; done
--
Hugh Greenberg
Los Alamos National Laboratory, CCS-1
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: (505) 665-6471
