 Home |
Products |
Support |
Community |
News |
xen-merge
[Xen-merge] CONFIG_XEN vs. CONFIG_X86{,_64}_XEN
| To: | <xen-merge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | [Xen-merge] CONFIG_XEN vs. CONFIG_X86{,_64}_XEN |
| From: | "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:14:43 +0100 |
| Delivery-date: | Wed, 21 Dec 2005 16:16:24 +0000 |
| Envelope-to: | www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| List-help: | <mailto:xen-merge-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
| List-id: | xen-merge <xen-merge.lists.xensource.com> |
| List-post: | <mailto:xen-merge@lists.xensource.com> |
| List-subscribe: | <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-merge>, <mailto:xen-merge-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
| List-unsubscribe: | <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-merge>, <mailto:xen-merge-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
| Sender: | xen-merge-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
What was the reason to split these? Why can't we just have a consistent CONFIG_XEN (provided in arch/*/Kconfig), and derive all architecture-specific information from other CONFIG_* values? Main reason for the question is the (apparently) inconsistent use of one or the other in various places. Thanks, Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-merge mailing list Xen-merge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-merge |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [Xen-merge] [PATCH] merge i386's pgtable*.h, Jan Beulich |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: [Xen-merge] CONFIG_XEN vs. CONFIG_X86{,_64}_XEN, Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins) |
| Previous by Thread: | [Xen-merge] [PATCH] fix boot image generation, Jan Beulich |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Xen-merge] CONFIG_XEN vs. CONFIG_X86{,_64}_XEN, Vincent Hanquez |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
