Re: [Xen-devel] xsd_errors

To:	John Levon <levon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [Xen-devel] xsd_errors
From:	Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Sun, 27 Aug 2006 15:46:28 +0100
Delivery-date:	Sun, 27 Aug 2006 07:46:43 -0700
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<20060826133254.GA17599@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help:	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id:	Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post:	<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index:	AcbJ55O+0jpMmzXaEdukHgAKle7CWA==
Thread-topic:	[Xen-devel] xsd_errors
User-agent:	Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.5.060620



On 26/8/06 2:32 pm, "John Levon" <levon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Having a static struct in a header file is somewhat of a problem (for
> one, it makes our 'lint' complain, quite rightly). Given that we'll have
> to have a copy in Linux anyway when the source trees finally split, does
> anyone have any objections to moving the definitions into xenbus_xs.c
> (for linux/solaris), and somewhere in tools/xenstore/ ?

If we do we'll have to leave a copy behind conditional on
XEN_INTERFACE_VERSION for API compatibility.

 -- Keir



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] xsd_errors