Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 4/6] raisin: pass --with-system-seabios with seabios was built

[Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2015, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-04-22 at 15:15 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Apr 2015, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2015-04-21 at 17:48 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > > Detect whether we have built seabios and only pass the relative command
> > > > line argument to Xen if we actually did.
> > > 
> > > For this and the following ovmf if we didn't build seabios/ovmf here
> > > then you pass nothing, which will result in xen.git downloading and
> > > doing things itself, is that what is wanted? I think, although I confess
> > > I'm not sure and I haven't checked, you can pass --without-thing to
> > > avoid this and to disable the support (which might hopefully result in
> > > clearer error messages to the user down the line).
> > 
> > This is a good point. I don't know what we want exactly here.
> > 
> > In the case of OVMF if you don't specify anything the default in Xen is
> > not to build it.
> > In the case of Seabios if you don't specify anything the default is
> > clone and build.
> > 
> > Do we want to be absolutely sure to avoid any cloning from the
> > xen-unstable tree with raisin?
> > Or do we simply want to fall back to the default behaviour?
> > 
> > I think that both a reasonable answers, I am leaning toward avoiding any
> > cloning always.
> 
> I think this makes sense. If a users wants ovmf they should ask for it
> via raisin, if they don't then they won't get it.
> 
> >  This also means disabling stubdoms.  What do you think?
> 
> Is the plan to eventually have raisin build stubdoms itself?

Yes, I think it would make sense for raisin to build them.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel