From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-f45.google.com (mail-it0-f45.google.com [209.85.214.45]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1624F605C3 for ; Wed, 28 Dec 2016 19:27:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-f45.google.com with SMTP id o141so175551268itc.0 for ; Wed, 28 Dec 2016 11:27:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8TSs/t+oLt9Q62Cn11cKjjSkbglDSxwpMBRGTxaxqs8=; b=yCVncX79YimlsXw7xQlMPnZeTZa93WppqgXgXsiQ47BtZ8127BKIxu7+PnXYHGbt2H xK5GvCW92R1zmUJ47mPWsRuKUhTvFXeCqoi9/4mLNPF14rfuBWuh6VQP3+k01Au3RWfJ CBJQ2kxLtcFtuBIP1Jo52U3XvYdKJoFyDtcJktpbNwtv6pBpIWNguSmU/0ZVoL93FBQW P7iikihB/vwR4boLirQBRxIdMgOz+vLFgH86hQe5dvzGxS6Qe7kvqq9hcfT/H8YLkCng KiOhOvjX/fh6keaqyEMqP8BFGovFv3te4axFRrJyzpUkM0M9OAa+larhOXTgug3jzm+1 LEBg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8TSs/t+oLt9Q62Cn11cKjjSkbglDSxwpMBRGTxaxqs8=; b=bBT13NToe4VXPEedfw5ptlMfvfUKUEOgPs5BFZfQzHR0mKyFilITIR9+Pkc+4mjz/0 LwrmxGs7GsfKiLxVLQJnq7qJIzUiZwSDL32RqvvbAQ3kInsHnvKhZOpoUtXWhRIvRyS8 YgXfw30gPDTPcm7hplT1fktu2jBvCT03gtJJrfvhLIYk4MC7z6849wRD9GM1bxGAh9XQ dW+eyaFi9ZzPjLBRzJttd1bklT+XAG8jzBt5bdfhPE0f+WAx9oyoCKDclO3YjzoqpE4w 7Z8Rgy/KLH1PRR9eo0gUbxuJU4kk/U+o8lzELkp5SAZhBeTAIbRhDm7UF/OcsAFZLX5W hbLw== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXIVHV8TKec/6EX/HKHzMA8FkAywEeDXqDhksOy1G5id87YH2tVJaz+1AtlHRZ1wz84r X-Received: by 10.36.77.207 with SMTP id l198mr30891360itb.18.1482953243451; Wed, 28 Dec 2016 11:27:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from pohly-mobl1 (p5DE8FC9C.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [93.232.252.156]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 96sm10249384ioh.27.2016.12.28.11.27.21 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 28 Dec 2016 11:27:22 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1482953240.32048.21.camel@intel.com> From: Patrick Ohly To: Ricardo Neri Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2016 20:27:20 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1482893793.106950.42.camel@ranerica-desktop> References: <1482893793.106950.42.camel@ranerica-desktop> Organization: Intel GmbH, Dornacher Strasse 1, D-85622 Feldkirchen/Munich X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1+b1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-core Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] UEFI + Secure Boot + qemu X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2016 19:27:23 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 2016-12-27 at 18:56 -0800, Ricardo Neri wrote: > On Wed, 2016-12-21 at 16:19 +0200, Fathi Boudra wrote: > > > > fwiw, I've been maintaining acpica recipe in meta-oe, and will keep an > > eye here as well. > > meta-luv supports both x86* and arm*, and we have an interest in > > having the same features available and working for qemuaarch64. > > I was not aware of this. Perhaps there is no need for us to maintain a > separate recipe in meta-luv. Looks like there is consensus that maintaining an acpica recipe in OE-core is the right approach. I'll prepare a revision of this patch series that includes acpica instead of iasl and also addresses the other points that Ricardo raised. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter.