[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 00 of 36] x86/paravirt: groundwork for 64-bit Xen support
- To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
- From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:36:27 -0700
- Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx>, Mark McLoughlin <markmc@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@xxxxxxxxxx>, Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@xxxxxxxxx>, Stephen Tweedie <sct@xxxxxxxxxx>, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, LKML <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@xxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:37:23 -0700
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
config and full log can be found at:
http://redhat.com/~mingo/misc/config-Mon_Jun_30_11_11_51_CEST_2008.bad
That config doesn't build for me. When I put it in place and do "make
oldconfig" it still asks for lots of config options (which I just set
to default). But when I build it fails with:
try 'make ARCH=i386 oldconfig' - does it work better that way?
Er, we're talking about 64-bit here, aren't we? The log messages are
from a 64-bit kernel.
Well, it was the wrong config anyway, which I guess is the source of
this confusion.
(I thought ARCH= to select 32/64 was going away now that the config has
the bitsize config?)
J
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
