From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: KVM call agenda for 2013-05-28 Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 20:09:35 +0200 Message-ID: <51A8E75F.5060405@redhat.com> References: <20130523124132.GA18596@redhat.com> <20130528235309.GA31648@morn.localdomain> <20130531023426.GB18156@morn.localdomain> <51A88D73.1090302@redhat.com> <87bo7rmhbp.fsf@codemonkey.ws> <1370009305.5141.95.camel@i7.infradead.org> <87mwrbqhn1.fsf@codemonkey.ws> <1370018019.5141.104.camel@i7.infradead.org> <871u8n9j01.fsf@codemonkey.ws> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Woodhouse , Laszlo Ersek , Jordan Justen , Kevin O'Connor , Juan Quintela , KVM devel mailing list , qemu-devel qemu-devel , seabios@seabios.org, ddutile@redhat.com, "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Anthony Liguori Return-path: Received: from mail-vb0-f47.google.com ([209.85.212.47]:55103 "EHLO mail-vb0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754718Ab3EaSJu (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 May 2013 14:09:50 -0400 Received: by mail-vb0-f47.google.com with SMTP id x13so1251285vbb.20 for ; Fri, 31 May 2013 11:09:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <871u8n9j01.fsf@codemonkey.ws> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Il 31/05/2013 19:06, Anthony Liguori ha scritto: > David Woodhouse writes: > >> On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 10:43 -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: >>> It's even more fundamental. OVMF as a whole (at least in it's usable >>> form) is not Open Source. >> >> The FAT module is required to make EDK2 usable, and yes, that's not Open >> Source. So in a sense you're right. >> >> But we're talking here about *replacing* the FAT module with something >> that *is* open source. And the FAT module isn't a fundamental part of >> EDK2; it's just an optional module that happens to be bundled with the >> repository. > > So *if* we replace the FAT module *and* that replacement was GPL, would > there be any objects to having more GPL modules for things like virtio, > ACPI, etc? > > And would that be doable in the context of OVMF or would another project > need to exist for this purpose? I don't think it would be doable in TianoCore. I think it would end up either in distros, or in QEMU. A separate question is whether OVMF makes more sense as part of TianoCore or rather as part of QEMU. With 75% of the free hypervisors now reunited under the same source repository, the balance is tilting... Paolo