[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] fw_cfg: RQFN rules, documentation

From: Laszlo Ersek
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] fw_cfg: RQFN rules, documentation
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 11:20:46 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.0

On 04/05/16 10:35, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> 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:         <root-prefix-to-strip>/...
>>>> 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.

Ah, understood. Thanks.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]