Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/4] Add socket/xnet libs to configure for Solaris

[Andreas Färber]

Am 27.03.2012 19:06, schrieb Blue Swirl:
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 13:14, Andreas Färber <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Am 27.03.2012 14:01, schrieb Lee Essen:
>>> On 27/03/2012 12:31, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>>> Am 27.03.2012 09:23, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi:
>>>>> On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 04:26:27PM +0000, Lee Essen wrote:
>>>>>> libsocket and libxnet are required for base network functionality
>>>>>> used in os_dep.c, qemu-socket.c, qga/commands-posix.c and cutils.c
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Lee Essen<address@hidden>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>   configure |    1 +
>>>>>>   1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/configure b/configure
>>>>>> index 8b4e3c1..152adaa 100755
>>>>>> --- a/configure
>>>>>> +++ b/configure
>>>>>> @@ -471,6 +471,7 @@ SunOS)
>>>>>>     QEMU_CFLAGS="-D__EXTENSIONS__ $QEMU_CFLAGS"
>>>>>>     QEMU_CFLAGS="-std=gnu99 $QEMU_CFLAGS"
>>>>>>     LIBS="-lsocket -lnsl -lresolv $LIBS"
>>>>>> +  libs_qga="-lsocket -lxnet $lib_qga"
>>>>>
>>>>> s/lib_qga/libs_qga/
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW this typo is also present in mingw32 libs_qga, I have sent a patch
>>>>> to fix it.
>>>>>
>>>>> So -lxnet isn't required in plain old LIBS?
>>>>
>>>> It's a question of generation AFAIU, I didn't like it either. By using
>>>> the old libs, then due to Solaris' backwards compatibility we are able
>>>> to run them on older Solaris versions in theory. We should be using the
>>>> same libs consistently in QEMU, and I don't like double-coding them.
>>>> Those comments were not yet addressed, just as my suggested subject for
>>>> the timer patch and the ordering of the patches was deliberately
>>>> ignored. :/ Since my patience is limited, I plan to fix them up myself
>>>> before applying them to my Solaris branch and sending a PULL.
>>>
>>> <rant>
>>>
>>> What?  I'm trying here ... I don't understand the ordering comment, your
>>> suggestion was about putting more meaningful titles, I've tried to do that.
>>>
>>> Blimey ... this isn't my job, this is my own time ... I'm doing this
>>> because I want to try to make things better and it feels like I'm having
>>> to jump through ever decreasing hoops.
>>>
>>> I'm new to the whole git patch submission thing (as is obviously
>>> apparent) ... so give me a break.
>>>
>>> And let's be clear here ... at the moment there is no support for
>>> Solaris, there are countless fundamental fixes that need to go in before
>>> it will even get close ... let alone thinking about kvm.
>>>
>>> I've tried very hard not to break any other platform, but still I can't
>>> even get a single thing applied.
>>>
>>> </rant>
>>>
>>> Ok, since I'm obviously incapable of providing patches in the right
>>> form, let me know if I can help in any other way. For now I will just
>>> maintain a separate tree.
>>
>> Sorry if this was harsh for you, you have indeed been trying and
>> improving things, but my issue is this:
>>
>> <rant>
>>
>> Apart from the C99 patch that has been committed now, QEMU has been
>> working fine for me as inofficial maintainer of Solaris host support.
> 
> Unofficial maintainer?
> git log --format="%aN: %s" | grep -i solaris
> tells a different story.

And what is that command supposed to show? I've been working with
Solaris/amd64 since University until the unfortunate Oracle thing
happened, and when you search for address@hidden on qemu-devel
and in history you should find some results. I'm not claiming to have
done the original port, nor to have posted loads of patches (which you
seem to be checking on above) but I certainly did take care of breakages
on OpenSolaris including most importantly reworking our Makefiles to no
longer rely on static libraries after device_init() and friends were
introduced.
Denying that would be an insult.

Andreas