On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 23:24 +0100, Stefan Weil wrote: > Am 15.03.2011 18:00, schrieb Alex Williamson: > > Refresh PXE ROMs from the iPXE project (http://ipxe.org). This > > includes moving eepro100 to use standard naming and including a > > script to easily refresh PXE ROMs from either a local git tree > > or the upstream project. We include the 'git describe' output > > in the resulting product name, making it easy to identify and > > reproduce.
Sorry for not cc'ing, I picked the wrong Stefan. > The name used for eepro100 was the result of this discussion thread: > http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2010-01/msg00729.html Thanks for the pointer, here's the relevant text: But a modified name without the gpxe version like gpxe-80861209.rom would have some advantages: * gpxe* is better than pxe* because the files contain a gPXE boot ROM - not a proprietary PXE ROM. A generic pxe- prefix to me doesn't imply a proprietary ROM, simply the purpose of the ROM. Naming it gpxe- just means here we'd need to rename everything to ipxe- and eventually lpxe-, npxe-, etc... * The romfiles are ROM files, not undefined binaries, so *.rom looks better than *.bin. I agree with this one, I'm happy to rename them as .rom files. * For drivers like eepro100.c which implement several devices, a naming rule based on PCI device and vendor id (80861209) is better than a rule based on device names: devices with same ids can share the same romfile. eepro100 now only has one ROM for all devices, so I think this is not currently an issue. As Kevin pointed out in the original thread, pxe-eepro100 is more meaningful to a user than pxe-80861209. * Transforming an etherboot romfile name to a qemu romfile name is simple when all you have to do is to remove the version. This would also simplify pc-bios/README. The README already leaves something to be desired for reproducibility, I'm hoping the subtree and build script clear that up. > So you could as well change all other rom names. > > iPXE default names like 80861209.rom are nice, too. Yes, but confusing when we end up using that same rom for every eepro100 variant. Thanks, Alex
