> On Jun 9, 2023, at 1:23 AM, Petr Štetiar wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> FYI there is an ongoing effort[1] to rename armvirt target to armsr (Arm
> SystemReady)
>
> armvirt/32 becomes armsr/armv7 (title: 32-bit (armv7) machines)
> armvirt/64 becomes armsr/armv8 (title: 64-bit (armv8) machines)
>
> BOA
> On May 28, 2023, at 2:09 AM, Petr Štetiar wrote:
>
> Mathew McBride [2023-05-26 16:16:31]:
>
> Hi Mathew,
>
>> I am just wondering if anyone has any significant objections that would
>> stop this pull from being merged? (after I fix any current conflicts)
>
> we should support it, so we n
Hi,
FYI there is an ongoing effort[1] to rename armvirt target to armsr (Arm
SystemReady)
armvirt/32 becomes armsr/armv7 (title: 32-bit (armv7) machines)
armvirt/64 becomes armsr/armv8 (title: 64-bit (armv8) machines)
BOARDNAME:=Arm SystemReady compliant (EFI)
armv7/armv8 subtarget seems li
Mathew McBride [2023-05-26 16:16:31]:
Hi Mathew,
> I am just wondering if anyone has any significant objections that would
> stop this pull from being merged? (after I fix any current conflicts)
we should support it, so we need to merge it.
> 23.05 has branched and there is already a pull requ
