From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60973) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbmLI-0005cW-7K for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Feb 2017 05:52:48 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbmLF-0007W9-4e for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Feb 2017 05:52:48 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:47886) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbmLE-0007VE-Uq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Feb 2017 05:52:45 -0500 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 010AA3DBD7 for ; Thu, 9 Feb 2017 10:52:45 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1486637562.3641.38.camel@redhat.com> From: Andrea Bolognani Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2017 11:52:42 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20170209094910.mrfhyjixmwr5kofb@kamzik.brq.redhat.com> References: <1486575331-14455-1-git-send-email-abologna@redhat.com> <1486575331-14455-3-git-send-email-abologna@redhat.com> <3fa3d4b8-3e3a-d6c4-a2c1-affef7361576@redhat.com> <20170209094910.mrfhyjixmwr5kofb@kamzik.brq.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 2/2] mach-virt: Provide sample configuration files List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Andrew Jones , Laszlo Ersek Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, marcel@redhat.com, kraxel@redhat.com On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 10:49 +0100, Andrew Jones wrote: > > > +# RHEL: > > > +#=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0/usr/share/AAVMF/AAVMF_CODE.fd > > > +#=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0/usr/share/AAVMF/AAVMF_VARS.fd > >=C2=A0 > > Looks legit. (Might want to call "RHEL" "RHELSA" though, in this cont= ext > > -- no clue. Ask Drew :)) >=C2=A0 > The first choice "RHEL" is correct. "RHELSA" still exists today, > but eventually that name should be phased out (IIUC), as AArch64 > will be "just another RHEL arch", requiring no special name. Can't wait for that day! I'll leave it unchanged then :) --=C2=A0 Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization