[edk2] [RFC] Proposal to add edk2-apps repository

krishnaLee sssky307 at 163.com
Sun Dec 2 18:01:15 PST 2018


Ruiyu,

At 2018-11-30 11:40:06, "Ni, Ruiyu" <ruiyu.ni at intel.com> wrote:
>I don't prefer edk2-libc unless we have a strategy/plan to make ordinary C developer easy by promoting the std-c pkg.
>The other reason I prefer edk2-app is then ShellPkg might be moved to that new repo.

I used to think ShellPkg can also develop apps has no dependency on it or libc,it would be a big app-container,but it seems its name will be mis-understanding...
I think your idea has the same function,and it's much better.


thanks,
krishna.








>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces at lists.01.org] On Behalf Of
>> krishnaLee
>> Sent: Friday, November 30, 2018 9:45 AM
>> To: edk2-devel at lists.01.org
>> Subject: Re: [edk2] [RFC] Proposal to add edk2-apps repository
>> 
>> Kinney,
>> I always think there may be two kinds of apps:
>> 1,some apps have dependency on uefi_shell(shell-lib,efi_shell_protocol,...they
>> usually execute under uefi_shell),I would call them "uefi_shell_application";
>> 2,some apps have no dependency on uefi_shell(such as apps in
>> MdeModulePkg/Application),I would call them "standard_uefi_application".
>> 
>> The "AppPkg / StdLib / StdLibPrivateInternalFiles" packages are usually used by
>> uefi_shell_application,I think they can all move to ShellPkg,no need to create
>> new package ?
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> krishna.
>> 
>> At 2018-11-30 08:46:58, "Kinney, Michael D" <michael.d.kinney at intel.com>
>> wrote:
>> >Leif,
>> >
>> >I did consider the edk2-libc name.  The port of Python 2.7 is in the
>> >AppPkg as well and it uses libc.
>> >
>> >So the content of this new package is a combination of libc And apps
>> >that use libc.
>> >
>> >I am definitely open to alternate names.  2 options so far:
>> >
>> >* edk2-apps
>> >* edk2-libc
>> >
>> >Thanks,
>> >
>> >Mike
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Leif Lindholm [mailto:leif.lindholm at linaro.org]
>> >> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2018 2:41 PM
>> >> To: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney at intel.com>
>> >> Cc: edk2-devel at lists.01.org
>> >> Subject: Re: [edk2] [RFC] Proposal to add edk2-apps repository
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 05:58:08PM +0000, Kinney, Michael D wrote:
>> >> > Hello,
>> >> >
>> >> > I would like to propose the creation of a new repository called
>> >> > edk2-apps.  This repository would initially be used to host the
>> >> > following packages from the edk2 repository:
>> >> >
>> >> > * AppPkg
>> >> > * StdLib
>> >> > * StdLibPrivateInternalFiles
>> >>
>> >> Let me start by saying I 100% back moving these out of the main edk2
>> >> repository.
>> >>
>> >> > These 3 packages provide support for the libc along with
>> >> > applications that depend on libc.  None of the other packages in
>> >> > the edk2 repository use these packages, so these 3 package can be
>> >> > safely moved without any impacts to platform firmware builds.
>> >> > Build configurations that do use libc features can clone the
>> >> > edk2-apps repository and add it to PACKAGES_PATH.
>> >>
>> >> I must confess to never having properly understood the scope of
>> >> AppPkg to begin with.
>> >>
>> >> AppPkg/Applications/Hello does not appear to have any further (real)
>> >> dependency on libc than MdeModulePkg/Application/HelloWorld/, and .
>> >>
>> >> And certainly MdeModulePkg/Applications contain plenty of ...
>> >> applications.
>> >>
>> >> So, if the purpose is simply to provide some examples of application
>> >> written to libc rather than UEFI - should this be edk2- libc instead?
>> >>
>> >> Best Regards,
>> >>
>> >> Leif
>> >>
>> >> > The history of these 3 packages would be preserved when importing
>> >> > the content into edk2-apps.  After The import is verified, these 3
>> >> > packages would be deleted from the edk2 repository.
>> >> >
>> >> > This proposal helps reduce the size of the edk2 repository and
>> >> > focuses edk2 repository on packages used to provide UEFI/PI
>> >> > conformant firmware.
>> >> >
>> >> > If there are no concerns with this proposal, I will enter a
>> >> > Tianocore BZs for the two steps.
>> >> >
>> >> > Best regards,
>> >> >
>> >> > Mike
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > edk2-devel mailing list
>> >> > edk2-devel at lists.01.org
>> >> > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >edk2-devel mailing list
>> >edk2-devel at lists.01.org
>> >https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
>> _______________________________________________
>> edk2-devel mailing list
>> edk2-devel at lists.01.org
>> https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel


More information about the edk2-devel mailing list