From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37460) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1anMSF-0001Kr-6i for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Apr 2016 04:35:20 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1anMSE-00081a-0B for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Apr 2016 04:35:19 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55884) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1anMSD-00081V-Ra for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Apr 2016 04:35:17 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 11:35:14 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20160405113207-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> References: <1459767028-28966-1-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <5702679B.2040600@redhat.com> <20160404155722.GA695@redhat.com> <5702A108.6010002@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5702A108.6010002@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] fw_cfg: RQFN rules, documentation List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Laszlo Ersek Cc: Paolo Bonzini , "Gabriel L . Somlo" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster , Gerd Hoffmann On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 07:14:48PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 04/04/16 17:57, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > >> ... My question is, do we need the "opt/" prefix at all (for the future, > >> i.e., the non-historical cases)? > >> Looking at the last discussion, I > >> believe we converged on: > >> > >> - QEMU devs (future filenames): org.qemu/... > >> - users: com.my_company/... > >> - QEMU fw devs (future names): org.tianocore.edk2.ovmf/... > >> org.seabios/... > >> - QEMU fw devs hacking: /... > >> > >> Did you find something unsafe about this (necessitating "opt/")? > >> > > > > The reason to use the opt/ prefix is to avoid warning > > with QEMU 2.4 and 2.5. > > Sorry, it's been a long day :), and I don't understand your answer. Can > you please spell it out for me? How are QEMU 2.4 and 2.5 related to this > discussion? > > Thanks! > Laszlo People would want to use the same command line for QEMU 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6. If you use a prefix without opt with 2.4/2.5 you get a warning, and if people get a warning from a valid command line, that's not nice, so we want a prefix that does not cause a warning for these versions. -- MST