From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f182.google.com (mail-io0-f182.google.com [209.85.223.182]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54D76773FE for ; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 15:32:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io0-f182.google.com with SMTP id j18so62976351ioe.2 for ; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 07:32:24 -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=DKffbwWbP9+Mwk539McF/DtZaEo0lQEttjuHOgfCgl0=; b=pXxZtcU0DaiY9X4nLQoQe0dsqf97XwzD0zqks5c0wcJ9tWCR5aTH2fOXQsHJmAuhk5 CS1RXLrYHVLNNpALjpxVzgGiT0e8KfWoI9GAkfhWrwABayH38YHAj8QzEYS/U0kEELlw C0ml+vzzf0MwRf14Go725VBwpgtklyIQ39W6WzGm6ewWNleVybjO/rwIymjftwb4yvVm 5o+XmN9zMJ0cdaCRsX2GdSZBY8A1Q9QxsHOFtGMb8f65ZW5wHSyo2k4Cq4Kv9RYjp1Uq xkkAZxEUoHSbStSb1CKonQc/sbNj3EWj6xyhymlR4OY/JeTSgpOQ+Lj/+Aw2z0NPMGoo G31g== 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=DKffbwWbP9+Mwk539McF/DtZaEo0lQEttjuHOgfCgl0=; b=MOvShJmBpthwWzbqGji/X6EdrYxYNmr5ZywNb78lJFIl9avUn5QUlfqCJiBhajQo4U Dg/RUhroruHQ0pPL5XahSgBnmMIGrYnFoSAeVM66RNakvknbokZTap8TBU4EUpLVX2uk giWkWbdxicJ4mk6qpqGxxg8oc04ifzikeTMWltiMi4AAzaOMDNsQ3bjXsgNzZgy1c/D1 HIr14WN4tLAurEcUgSWw0XHlcSeDUwnEkqeLtcGRHkpwA8mVeT3nowKRGP3L2RATrHk3 HuO6DOGompykFuf28nXMyT1og3pv/gRkVGcdvXChq9pX3LWT28nkDHS+ZdXIH7WrFS1b AKgw== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXK/hrz1bgyCpS8sGprOa0l7vPQ9Ao+qQgb/Ecxw56lfx1KBFxwGDPic/xwMOnsgdGJ4 X-Received: by 10.107.19.131 with SMTP id 3mr8249392iot.198.1485531144413; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 07:32:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from pohly-mobl1 (p5DE8DB2E.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [93.232.219.46]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c100sm1389342itd.20.2017.01.27.07.32.22 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 27 Jan 2017 07:32:23 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1485531141.20333.116.camel@intel.com> From: Patrick Ohly To: Ricardo Neri Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 16:32:21 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1485487510.41148.67.camel@ranerica-desktop> References: <9d68428a1d2b7234a1a7ea6057e3b027e454db61.1484921498.git-series.patrick.ohly@intel.com> <1485156197.41148.8.camel@ranerica-desktop> <1485157551.20333.14.camel@intel.com> <1485487510.41148.67.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@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/12] ovmf: deploy firmware in image directory 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: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 15:32:24 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 19:25 -0800, Ricardo Neri wrote: > On Mon, 2017-01-23 at 08:45 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote: > > > On the other hand, this is a new recipe and this may not be super > > > critical. Especially if you meant that only OVMF will not support > > > installing bios.bin in sysroot. Maybe all is needed is some > > > clarification in the commit message. > > > > Care to suggest something? ;-) To me, "traditional usage of ovmf ... > > is > > no longer supported" already says that this is a statement about ovmf, > > not the bios parameter, so I'm not sure how to reword this. > > Perhaps specifying what "traditional usage" means, both when using > runqemu or qemu directly. I think this is useful as you devoted a fair > amount of effort to enable your work in qemu. Mentioning the qemu > features could be useful to people using qemu directly. I've tried to make the commit message more useful in V5. -- 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.