w directories no longer treated as
individual IP-silos?
Regards,
Leif
> Thanks,
>
> Andrew Fish
>
> > -Jordan
> >
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-
> >>> From: Justen, Jordan L
> >>> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2016 4:55 P
t; From: Justen, Jordan L
>>> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2016 4:55 PM
>>> To: Mudusuru, Giri P ; Kinney, Michael D
>>> ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org; Kinney, Michael D
>>>
>>> Cc: Mudusuru, Giri P
>>> Subject: RE: [edk2] [RFC V2] Propo
Justen, Jordan L
> > Sent: Monday, June 20, 2016 4:55 PM
> > To: Mudusuru, Giri P ; Kinney, Michael D
> > ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org; Kinney, Michael D
> >
> > Cc: Mudusuru, Giri P
> > Subject: RE: [edk2] [RFC V2] Proposal to organize packages into directories
, Michael D
> ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org; Kinney, Michael D
>
> Cc: Mudusuru, Giri P
> Subject: RE: [edk2] [RFC V2] Proposal to organize packages into directories
>
> On 2016-06-17 15:58:38, Mudusuru, Giri P wrote:
> > Thanks Mike. My preference is Silicon as it is gener
sts.01.org] On Behalf Of
> > Kinney, Michael D
> > Sent: Friday, June 17, 2016 10:50 AM
> > To: Justen, Jordan L ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org;
> > Kinney, Michael D
> > Subject: Re: [edk2] [RFC V2] Proposal to organize packages into directories
> >
> > Hi Jo
> To: Justen, Jordan L ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org;
> Kinney, Michael D
> Subject: Re: [edk2] [RFC V2] Proposal to organize packages into directories
>
> Hi Jordan,
>
> Yes. Many terms were considered other than Silicon, except Carbon :)
>
> None of the terms we have
t: Wednesday, June 1, 2016 1:07 PM
> To: Kinney, Michael D ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org;
> Kinney,
> Michael D
> Subject: Re: [edk2] [RFC V2] Proposal to organize packages into directories
>
> On 2016-05-25 19:03:38, Kinney, Michael D wrote:
> > # Top Level Direct
On 2016-05-25 19:03:38, Kinney, Michael D wrote:
> # Top Level Directory Structure (Listed Alphabetically)
> ```
> edk2
> Application Applications and application support libraries
> BaseTools EDK II build tools/scripts
> Conf EDK II build configuration files
> Co
o:edk2-devel-boun...@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of
> Bhupesh Sharma
> Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2016 11:00 AM
> To: Kinney, Michael D ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> Subject: Re: [edk2] [RFC V2] Proposal to organize packages into directories
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> This looks really
On 5/26/2016 4:53 PM, Andrew Fish wrote:
2) Pthreads is not directly supported in Windows. This could also be worked
around with 3rd party software.
The standard solution for pthreads on Windows is pthreads-win32:
https://www.sourceware.org/pthreads-win32/
--
Bruce
1.org] On Behalf Of
> Kinney, Michael D
> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 9:04 PM
> To: edk2-devel@lists.01.org; Kinney, Michael D
>
> Subject: [edk2] [RFC V2] Proposal to organize packages into directories
>
> Hello,
>
> I have gone through all the feedback I have re
or a Vendor specific directory in the future, then I have
>>> no issues with removing Emulated and moving EmulatorPkg to Common.
>>>
>>
>> I think it would still be better to make the architecture association
>> rather than 'Emulated'.
Justen, Jordan L
> Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 1:38 PM
> To: Kinney, Michael D ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org;
> Kinney,
> Michael D
> Cc: Ni, Ruiyu
> Subject: RE: [edk2] [RFC V2] Proposal to organize packages into directories
>
> On 2016-05-26 11:51:09, Kinney, Michael D wrote:
o Common.
>
I think it would still be better to make the architecture association
rather than 'Emulated'.
-Jordan
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Justen, Jordan L
> > Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 11:13 AM
> > To: Kinney, Michael D ;
> > edk2-de
: Justen, Jordan L ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org; Ni,
Ruiyu
Subject: Re: [edk2] [RFC V2] Proposal to organize packages into directories
> Is anyone still using UnixPkg? If not, then maybe it should be moved to
> Deprecated.
does this matter? it's just an empty directory with a "Depreca
rdan L
> > Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 11:13 AM
> > To: Kinney, Michael D ;
> edk2-devel@lists.01.org; Kinney,
> > Michael D
> > Cc: Ni, Ruiyu
> > Subject: Re: [edk2] [RFC V2] Proposal to organize packages into
> directories
> >
> > On 201
ject: Re: [edk2] [RFC V2] Proposal to organize packages into directories
>
> On 2016-05-25 19:03:38, Kinney, Michael D wrote:
> > edk2
> > Platform
> > Common
> > DuetPkg
> > OvmfPkg
> > CorebootPayloadPkg
> > Emulated
> &g
On 2016-05-25 19:03:38, Kinney, Michael D wrote:
> edk2
> Platform
> Common
> DuetPkg
> OvmfPkg
> CorebootPayloadPkg
> Emulated
> EmulatorPkg
> Nt32Pkg
> UnixPkg
UnixPkg has been replaced by EmulatorPkg.
I think EmulatorPkg and Nt32Pkg should be m
26, 2016 3:56 AM
> To: edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> Cc: Kinney, Michael D
> Subject: RE: [edk2] [RFC V2] Proposal to organize packages into directories
>
> Hey Mike,
>
> Thank you very much for your effort of introducing a new directory structure,
> it looks
>
mailto:edk2-devel-boun...@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of
> Kinney, Michael D
> Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 4:04 AM
> To: edk2-devel@lists.01.org; Kinney, Michael D
>
> Subject: [edk2] [RFC V2] Proposal to organize packages into directories
>
> Hello,
>
> I have gone thr
Hello,
I have gone through all the feedback I have received and have updated this
proposal. Here is a summary of the changes in V2:
* IntelFrameworkModulePkg -> Deprecated
* IntelFrameworkPkg -> Deprecated
* IntelFspPkg -> Deprecated
* IntelFspWrapperPkg
21 matches
Mail list logo
