On Thu, 2015-08-06 at 11:56 +0100, Wei Liu wrote: > On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 11:48:15AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Thu, 2015-08-06 at 11:17 +0100, Wei Liu wrote: > > > > > > I don't think so. Though the doc is not clear on how we should use > > > those > > > APIs, I got my idea from > > > > > > http://0pointer.de/public/cups-patch-core.txt > > > > > > which doesn't call sd_booted. > > > > OK, FM then: Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campb...@citrix.com> > > > > As a future cleanup I think some of the ifdeferry could be removed by > > having systemd = false ifndef SYSTEMD_ENABLED, what do you think? > > Maybe. In the end there has to be some ifdeferry some where to gate the > implementation. As a future cleanup I think I can provide a stub > systemd_checkin() which always returns false and remove all ifdef in > main().
Right, that's what I meant, i.e. just reduce the amount of ifdef. > > Wei. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
