Chris Wright wrote: >* zach@xxxxxxxxxx (zach@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > >>Attempt to fix the UML build by assuming the default i386 subarchitecture >>(mach-default). >> >>I can't fully test this because spinlock breakage is still happening in >>my tree, but it gets rid of the mach_xxx.h missing file warnings. >> >> > >I assume this is intended to fix a build error caused by patches in the >earlier set which added more reliance on mach-default? > > Yes, I already sent the fix to Jeff and Andrew, so it may already included in anything based off -mm1. But it seems a good idea in general for UML. I got a 100% clean um-i386 build after this patch on -rc5-mm1. Zach
