Hi, On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 13:22:55 +0200, Evgeni Golov wrote: > On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 22:13:15 +0300 Guillem Jover wrote: > > > > Did you already sent a patch upstream? If not I'll try to get in > > > contact with Michal on IRC sometime soon. > > > > No, I didn't. Also in case there's fixes needed in libx86 I'm sure > > Matthew would be happy to take them. > > I talked with Michal and he does not like the idea to link against > libx86, as he wants to have it compiled staticaly with klibc, which > will be impossible when we use libx86.
He can still statically link against libx86, which is bad, but still better than embedding the whole source code in the tarball and having an actual fork of the thing. But I don't understand why he needs to statically link? > We still can do this on our own though :) Good. :) > But I have another concern. I would like to integrate v86d into an > initrd. If v86d is linked dynamicaly against libx86, this has to be > present in the initrd too, should I copy it then in my hook file? I > think so. Is this okay? While looking > into /usr/share/initramfs-tools/hooks I dont see any scripts doing that. Yeah as you found out, it should be taken care of already. regards, guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
