[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for May, Tuesday 8th

From: Anthony Liguori
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for May, Tuesday 8th
Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 09:24:42 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120329 Thunderbird/11.0.1

On 05/08/2012 09:10 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:
Am 07.05.2012 14:54, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
On 05/07/2012 06:47 AM, Juan Quintela wrote:

Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.

- Status of the 1.1 release

Since it looked like the call is not going to take place lacking
feedback from Anthony, I will provocatively go ahead and say the status
of 1.1 is pretty bad, currently. ;)

rc0 is available, but patches submitted for 1.1 shortly before rc0
neither got review nor were applied. Neither did pulls or patches
applied by Anthony get such a notice fwiw so that it's hard to
distinguish what's missing for anyone but the patch author.

All pulls got handled before -rc0 was tagged.

With rc0 not being provided as tarball, it would be nice to document the
official, reproducible way of packaging a QEMU tarball on the Wiki. I
have collected some steps from the Rob Landley mips thread, but the
submodules complicate things a bit.

-rc0's are never provided as a tarball. This is how the release process works and someone always complains about it :-(

rc1 should've been released yesterday, but it's not available yet, no
info and same issue with patches not being applied.

I missed a flight yesterday and spent the entire day at an airport so I didn't tag it yesterday. I'm going to work on it today.

In the current state of master, rc1 will not build on ppc due to an
#error introduced since rc0 by malc - with its history, Darwin/ppc
should not be a release blocker here and *some* fix to restore the build
should please be applied soon.

So... what's the fix?


Anthony Liguori

And worse, there's more and more colliding patch series on the list -
fixed-width visitors, realize, QBus, VMState, AREG0, CPU - for which we
need a strategy to coordinate our ongoing development and post-1.1
merging. Someone needs to rebase on someone else, question is whom.

Some downstream feedback: I've so far been unable to do a static build
of v1.1-rc0 in the openSUSE build system due to a -lpcre coming from
gthread-2.0.pc Libs.private - an issue we don't see for v1.0.1. If
another distro has encountered that issue I'd be grateful for feedback.
Might be our own issue.
In course of investigating though, I've noticed that lots of our
configure checks are not limited to non-static/softmmu builds and will
contribute cflags/libs to a static linux-user build even if unused.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]