On 08.07.2022 17:39, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>> On 24 Jun 2022, at 17:04, Anthony PERARD <[email protected]> wrote:
>> @@ -87,21 +89,21 @@ roms.inc: $(ROMS)
>>
>> ifneq ($(ROMBIOS_ROM),)
>>      echo "#ifdef ROM_INCLUDE_ROMBIOS" >> [email protected]
>> -    sh ../../misc/mkhex rombios $(ROMBIOS_ROM) >> [email protected]
>> +    $(SHELL) $(XEN_ROOT)/tools/misc/mkhex rombios $(ROMBIOS_ROM) >> [email protected]
>>      echo "#endif" >> [email protected]
>> endif
>>
>> ifneq ($(STDVGA_ROM),)
>>      echo "#ifdef ROM_INCLUDE_VGABIOS" >> [email protected]
>> -    sh ../../misc/mkhex vgabios_stdvga $(STDVGA_ROM) >> [email protected]
>> +    $(SHELL) $(XEN_ROOT)/tools/misc/mkhex vgabios_stdvga $(STDVGA_ROM) >> 
>> [email protected]
>>      echo "#endif" >> [email protected]
>> endif
>> ifneq ($(CIRRUSVGA_ROM),)
>>      echo "#ifdef ROM_INCLUDE_VGABIOS" >> [email protected]
>> -    sh ../../misc/mkhex vgabios_cirrusvga $(CIRRUSVGA_ROM) >> [email protected]
>> +    $(SHELL) $(XEN_ROOT)/tools/misc/mkhex vgabios_cirrusvga 
>> $(CIRRUSVGA_ROM) >> [email protected]
>>      echo "#endif" >> [email protected]
>> endif
>> -    mv [email protected] $@
>> +    mv -f [email protected] $@
> 
> Here, instead of -f, is it safer -u? What’s your opinion on that? The patch 
> looks good to me.

Would -u be an option to use in the first place? It's not a standard
option to mv, afaict.

Jan

Reply via email to