From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58091) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1an85Y-0008GV-1R for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2016 13:14:56 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1an85U-0001TE-QJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2016 13:14:55 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52362) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1an85U-0001TA-Kp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2016 13:14:52 -0400 References: <1459767028-28966-1-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <5702679B.2040600@redhat.com> <20160404155722.GA695@redhat.com> From: Laszlo Ersek Message-ID: <5702A108.6010002@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 19:14:48 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160404155722.GA695@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] fw_cfg: RQFN rules, documentation List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: Paolo Bonzini , "Gabriel L . Somlo" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster , Gerd Hoffmann 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: /... >> >> 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