Hi! On NetBSD, uname -m prints ''amd64''. Attached patch makes gpxe aware of that. Signed-off-by: Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@amd.com> -- ---to satisfy European Law for business letters: Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach b. Muenchen Geschaeftsfuehrer: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 02:25:36PM +0200, Christoph Egger wrote:> > Hi! > > On NetBSD, uname -m prints ''amd64''. > Attached patch makes gpxe aware of that. > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@amd.com> > > -- > ---to satisfy European Law for business letters: > Advanced Micro Devices GmbH > Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach b. Muenchen > Geschaeftsfuehrer: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd > Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen > Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632> diff -r eec4447a500c tools/firmware/etherboot/patches/Makefile.patch > --- /dev/null Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000 > +++ b/tools/firmware/etherboot/patches/Makefile.patch Mon Jul 19 14:22:14 2010 +0200 > @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@ > +--- a/src/Makefile.orig 2010-07-19 13:09:06.000000000 +0200 > ++++ b/src/Makefile 2010-07-19 13:04:11.000000000 +0200 > +@@ -71,7 +71,8 @@ noargs : blib $(BIN)/NIC $(BIN)/gpxe.dsk > + # If no architecture is specified in Config or on the command-line, > + # use that of the build machine. > + # > +-ARCH ?= $(shell uname -m | sed -e s,i[3456789]86,i386,) > ++ARCH ?= $(shell uname -m | sed -e s,i[3456789]86,i386, \ > ++ -e s,amd64,x86_64,)How about ... sed -e ''s,\(i[3456789]86\|amd64\),i386,'')> + > + # handle x86_64 like i386, but set -m32 option for 32bit code only > + ifeq ($(ARCH),x86_64) > diff -r eec4447a500c tools/firmware/etherboot/patches/series > --- a/tools/firmware/etherboot/patches/series Mon Jul 19 12:58:28 2010 +0200 > +++ b/tools/firmware/etherboot/patches/series Mon Jul 19 14:22:14 2010 +0200 > @@ -1,1 +1,2 @@ > +Makefile.patch > boot_prompt_option.patchIs this a separate change? _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Christoph Egger writes ("[Xen-devel] [PATCH] tools: gpxe build
fix"):> On NetBSD, uname -m prints ''amd64''.
> Attached patch makes gpxe aware of that.
Are there any other systems on which uname -m prints amd64 on which
this patch will break ?
I think calling a patch "Makefile.patch" is going to be annoying.
And patches in a series should not be named just after the file they
change as if only one patch touches each file.
How about "makefile-amd64.patch" ?
Also "gpxe build fix" is a hopeless commit message.
Ian.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
On 21/07/2010 16:41, "Ian Jackson" <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:> Christoph Egger writes ("[Xen-devel] [PATCH] tools: gpxe build fix"): >> On NetBSD, uname -m prints ''amd64''. >> Attached patch makes gpxe aware of that. > > Are there any other systems on which uname -m prints amd64 on which > this patch will break ? > > I think calling a patch "Makefile.patch" is going to be annoying. > And patches in a series should not be named just after the file they > change as if only one patch touches each file. > > How about "makefile-amd64.patch" ? > > Also "gpxe build fix" is a hopeless commit message.I ended up upgrading us to far more recent gpxe, where this whole issue has simply disappeared. -- Keir> Ian. > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel