From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f170.google.com (mail-io0-f170.google.com [209.85.223.170]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FBFC719E7 for ; Thu, 12 Jan 2017 07:42:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io0-f170.google.com with SMTP id j13so12281322iod.3 for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 23:42:47 -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=NIycw8+9iA1ZeYsZlWWFMvBn8zFRNwadEfQGXVkKsdY=; b=rWKdzoBF7f8w0xSOn5EsYNBEkK+fqy+8BUr7tgss+XmvI4db/7+UpyddmowYxQA0ug 0Ie6WEdDwL/QHtYjbuku7kc4yG01O9WVR7K9HSXiEg9gGWCR6vImS0AompvKQ14SfD4x 3VIAW0mfYIARbzInGy67h/TTlnKybdt/9sRFk0efjQz7SdVCsi3DS4iWgqfvR5dFr+Mk V4P/Q7O4o+qxaSszW0Wo31424GmXD5De0/0DN8Xd5VoEpNhjWBXwNMJuS2CimW5qF7m4 IugGBBMiB4MX4hP2dU8caFZ8nKIGLtkmRnQhP/Cxv61/ia3tQFY1HZubN2cUHCXq5OQz 7Mvw== 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=NIycw8+9iA1ZeYsZlWWFMvBn8zFRNwadEfQGXVkKsdY=; b=O40Tmp75xrN696o2flpnxqgv22UpamhVTv+MupYCpoDM+QJzTc5yKaRAn73Q98ECFc Hnu4DcseaUN++w37fJ+aoOxDCM436rRYojq06XkdUvY6X/I+BiR3FeigHcTJoiuMSYJj 4614pcjwWs/gAdyC58Sla1vurFmRBZGdk+3nr4zcidySEk6aavgVGQAuUpX8Bb+WX/K3 Nc4ykd00BcuHE3vzHnJlAWQ9mwnW1VpTi5Brc04kXy7oYDbZ5DrBWZDxFTe/UFRR1b9h HIYiC+3MiHuneKYnmP02ZOyZgxxQDAauLEZ5hMTnq9/EudCEDdKCAVzab9npwudC4T6D 3y4w== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKy0392SM1nBjvX8YbXi2qcYO+/Pfse//BfI7czy7aYJjzALinNckw5Cmd2+eBkqnpw X-Received: by 10.107.84.2 with SMTP id i2mr13362207iob.176.1484206966986; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 23:42:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from pohly-mobl1 (p5DE8F981.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [93.232.249.129]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k6sm4450976ioe.1.2017.01.11.23.42.44 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 11 Jan 2017 23:42:45 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1484206962.2137.129.camel@intel.com> From: Patrick Ohly To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 08:42:42 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Intel GmbH, Dornacher Strasse 1, D-85622 Feldkirchen/Munich X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1+b1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/11] runqemu: support UEFI with OVMF firmware 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: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 07:42:47 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 2017-01-10 at 17:07 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote: > ovmf is not built by default. Either do it explicitly ("bitbake ovmf") > or make it a part of the normal build > ("MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS_append = ' ovmf'"). Wrong advice in the commit message: MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS doesn't work (it tries to install a non-existent ovmf package into the rootfs and fails), use EXTRA_IMAGEDEPENDS instead (same mechanism that also triggers building qemu-native). I'll fix this if a v3 of this series becomes necessary, but wouldn't do that just for this fix alone. -- 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.