From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=192.55.52.120; helo=mga04.intel.com; envelope-from=ray.ni@intel.com; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD04B211F1E19 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 19:17:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Apr 2019 19:17:19 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,302,1549958400"; d="scan'208";a="160878304" Received: from fmsmsx108.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.206]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 02 Apr 2019 19:17:19 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx155.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.71) by FMSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.206) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 19:17:18 -0700 Received: from shsmsx153.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.6.53) by FMSMSX155.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.71) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 19:17:18 -0700 Received: from shsmsx104.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.5.92]) by SHSMSX153.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.12.139]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 10:17:15 +0800 From: "Ni, Ray" To: 'Laszlo Ersek' , "Bi, Dandan" , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" CC: "Cetola, Stephano" , "Kinney, Michael D" , "Gao, Liming" , "Carsey, Jaben" Thread-Topic: [edk2] [RFC] Plan to delete ShellBinPkg from edk2/master Thread-Index: AQHU6TD9ICuk1YaZWUyhSVBfvoUJsqYps5LQ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2019 02:17:15 +0000 Message-ID: <734D49CCEBEEF84792F5B80ED585239D5C0C69A2@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <3C0D5C461C9E904E8F62152F6274C0BB40BB5D6F@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> <9492a5a0-58fc-4e49-4645-0593aa758660@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <9492a5a0-58fc-4e49-4645-0593aa758660@redhat.com> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC] Plan to delete ShellBinPkg from edk2/master X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2019 02:17:20 -0000 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > -----Original Message----- > From: edk2-devel On Behalf Of Laszlo > Ersek > Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 4:49 PM > To: Bi, Dandan ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org > Cc: Cetola, Stephano ; Kinney, Michael D > ; Gao, Liming ; Carsey, > Jaben > Subject: Re: [edk2] [RFC] Plan to delete ShellBinPkg from edk2/master >=20 > On 04/02/19 07:38, Bi, Dandan wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > ShellBinPkg is the remaining binary package in Edk2 repo. We plan to > delete ShellBinPkg from edk2/master, and keep source ShellPkg only in edk= 2 > repo. > > Before the deletion, I will update the existing consumers in Edk2 and > Edk2Platforms to use ShellPkg directly. > > > > If you have any concern please raise here before mid-April . If there i= s no > concern, I will create patches for this task after mid-April. > > > > Bugzilla for this task: > > https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D1675 >=20 > (adding a few CC's) >=20 > I think we should not remove ShellBinPkg without a replacement > *somehwere*. >=20 > A shell binary that is built from a validated edk2 tree, with a set of li= brary > resolutions and PCD settings that are known to keep platform dependencies > *out* of the shell binary, is extremely useful. I understand the concern. Maybe a "Shell.dsc.inc" provided by ShellPkg which lists all library resolu= tions , PCD settings and build options can be included by platform DSC to resolve= such dependency issue. >=20 > IIRC, Andrew suggested earlier that we should treat the shell even as an = "OS", > with better compatibility standards than we currently maintain. >=20 > I think we should only remove ShellBinPkg if we permanently offer a > separate download location instead, and we rebuild the shell binary from > "ShellPkg/ShellPkg.dsc" at every stable tag. I do not quite understand. All other modules in edk2 repo are source-includ= ed by OvmfPkg and daily commits directly generates new binaries for OvmfPkg. I do not think we should have a different "binary-generation" model for shell. >=20 > In that case, removing ShellBinPkg would indeed improve the edk2 tree, in > my opinion. >=20 > Thanks, > Laszlo > _______________________________________________ > edk2-devel mailing list > edk2-devel@lists.01.org > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel