Re: [Qemu-devel] AVMF & OVMF blobs in QEMU tree???

[Igor Mammedov]

On Mon, 21 Aug 2017 13:58:26 +0200
Gerd Hoffmann <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Mon, 2017-08-07 at 18:51 +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> > On 08/07/17 16:40, Peter Maydell wrote:  
> > > On 7 August 2017 at 15:31, Igor Mammedov <address@hidden>
> > > wrote:  
> > > > As I recall there were issues with FAT driver licensing in edk2,
> > > > but I've heard there were some changes in that regard.
> > > > 
> > > > Is there any other reasons why we are not putting subj.
> > > > in QEMU tree like we do with SeaBIOS and other roms?  
> > > 
> > > I suspect the primary answer is "nobody who's willing to
> > > maintain, test and update the resulting binary blobs has
> > > stepped forward to say they want to do so" :-)
> > > 
> > > (I think that shipping them in the QEMU tree would be
> > > nice but is principally a convenience for our direct
> > > users, since distros are going to want to build their
> > > own ROM blobs from source anyway.)  
> > 
> > I agree that OVMF and ArmVirtQemu firmware binaries (and matching
> > varstore templates, likely compressed) should be bundled with QEMU.
> > There are no license-related reasons left that would prevent this.
> > 
> > Please let us discuss this when Gerd returns from vacation. (CC'ing
> > Gerd.)  
> 
> slighly oldish wip branch:
> https://www.kraxel.org/cgit/qemu/log/?h=work/edk2
> 
> Related question (as the edk2 blobs are pretty big):  Do we want commit
> this to the qemu repo directly?   Or should we create a qemu-firmware
> repo for the precompiled blobs and hook it up as submodule?
I suppose both would work for me (making make check work),
though I'd prefer in tree blob (as I didn't have much experience with 
submodules).
So it's up to you to pick way that makes it simpler to maintain.

> 
> cheers,
>   Gerd
>