From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NVD6s-0004iH-Cg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:58:46 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NVD6n-0004ZW-Bh for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:58:45 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=51630 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NVD6n-0004ZG-7m for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:58:41 -0500 Received: from mail-qy0-f194.google.com ([209.85.221.194]:65142) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NVD6m-0000UN-MB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:58:40 -0500 Received: by qyk32 with SMTP id 32so3471273qyk.4 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 15:58:39 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B4E5E2B.9080300@codemonkey.ws> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:58:35 -0600 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4B4CD0F3.2050607@codemonkey.ws> <20100113045148.GD12792@morn.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20100113045148.GD12792@morn.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: Advise on updating SeaBIOS in stable List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin O'Connor Cc: seabios@seabios.org, qemu-devel On 01/12/2010 10:51 PM, Kevin O'Connor wrote: > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 01:43:47PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I'm ready to cut another qemu stable release and I'm contemplating >> whether to update to 0.5.1 in stable. Generally speaking, we try to >> limit stable to bug fixes and changes that aren't user visible. >> >> 0.5.1 looks like a point on the master branch as opposed to a >> separate branch. I wonder what the thinking is within SeaBIOS about >> what sort of changes will be in the 0.5.x series vs. what would >> result in 0.6.0. >> > Hi Anthony, > > I didn't have a particular release numbering scheme in mind when I > tagged 0.5.1. I'd probably lean towards making a "v0.5.0.x" branch if > we want an update with just critical bug fixes. > > However, there have only been a few bug fixes (mostly workarounds for > compiler oddities), though the yield fix (fb214dc7) and ram over 4gig > fix (669c991d) should go in. > I actually need the compiler fix to build on my laptop (F12) so I've included that too. Care to take a look at git://git.qemu.org/seabios.git stable-0.5.0? It survives some light testing and I'll be doing more thorough testing overnight. If you want to add some more and/or tag a release, I'll resync again before cutting 0.12.2. > If you're looking to pull in 32bit pcibios support, then I don't think > it would be worthwhile to rebase to a stable branch, as the 32bit > pcibios support is easily the biggest user visible change in v0.5.1 > (in the sense that Linux will call 32bit pcibios if it's available). > Unless there's a strong demand for it, I'd like to hold off on 32bit pcibios support. Thanks, Anthony Liguori > A couple of other changes could be user visible (eg, mptable), but I > think the risk here is pretty small (assuming we haven't introduced a > regression). > > So, I'm okay with a stable branch (eg, v0.5.0.x), but I'm not sure > what you would like to see in that branch. > > -Kevin >