From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.132.183.28; helo=mx1.redhat.com; envelope-from=lersek@redhat.com; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) (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 1E754211CD9CD for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 03:09:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C08D1308213A; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 10:09:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lacos-laptop-7.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-120-127.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.120.127]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23B3162478; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 10:09:31 +0000 (UTC) To: "Ni, Ray" , "Bi, Dandan" , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" Cc: "Cetola, Stephano" , "Kinney, Michael D" , "Gao, Liming" , "Carsey, Jaben" References: <3C0D5C461C9E904E8F62152F6274C0BB40BB5D6F@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> <9492a5a0-58fc-4e49-4645-0593aa758660@redhat.com> <734D49CCEBEEF84792F5B80ED585239D5C0C69A2@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> From: Laszlo Ersek Message-ID: <82ac9c41-e12d-7287-74f2-d8bea4516280@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2019 12:09:31 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <734D49CCEBEEF84792F5B80ED585239D5C0C69A2@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.42]); Wed, 03 Apr 2019 10:09:33 +0000 (UTC) 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 10:09:35 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 04/03/19 04:17, Ni, Ray wrote: > > >> -----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 >> >> 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 edk2 >> 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 is no >> concern, I will create patches for this task after mid-April. >>> >>> Bugzilla for this task: >>> https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1675 >> >> (adding a few CC's) >> >> I think we should not remove ShellBinPkg without a replacement >> *somehwere*. >> >> A shell binary that is built from a validated edk2 tree, with a set of library >> 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 resolutions > , PCD settings and build options can be included by platform DSC to resolve such > dependency issue. > >> >> IIRC, Andrew suggested earlier that we should treat the shell even as an "OS", >> with better compatibility standards than we currently maintain. >> >> 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-included 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. The standalone shell binary would not be offered for OVMF, but for all possible UEFI platforms (physical and virtual alike). People frequently turn to the UEFI shell for debugging UEFI issues on their physical machines. Such users are generally not interested in building the shell from source, just booting it as easily as possible. Thanks, Laszlo >> In that case, removing ShellBinPkg would indeed improve the edk2 tree, in >> my opinion. >> >> Thanks, >> Laszlo >> _______________________________________________ >> edk2-devel mailing list >> edk2-devel@lists.01.org >> https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel