On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 8:55 AM Mike Banon <mikeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If the upstream edk2 is so bad - have you tried to upstream your set > of patches? It is good that your personal fork/repo is stable, but > inevitably it will always lag behind the upstream, not benefiting from > some new features and bugfixes. Same reason why I didn't want to fork > a coreboot despite having a big set of unofficial patches , instead > trying to upstream them when I have some free time. > given that CorebootPayloadPackage has been removed and replaced with UefiPayloadPackage, there's no point in doing so. If UefiPayloadPkg is functional as-is, then we can certainly switch over to it, but my understanding is that it is not. And I haven't had time to investigate/test myself. > > > On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 11:41 PM Matt DeVillier <matt.devill...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > there is no "stable" branch for upstream edk2 though. Previously, > coreboot used an arbitrary commit as stable, and applied ~7 patches on top > if it to make it functional. Even the UDK201x branches don't boot without > patches > > > > On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 3:30 PM Lance Zhao <lance.z...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Tianocore master branch build from edk2 will break, but that had been > quite some time. Stable branch is working fine though. > >> > >> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019, 3:28 AM Matt DeVillier <matt.devill...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 1:27 PM Mike Banon <mikeb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Also, regarding the significant changes: " ### Tianocore UEFI > >>>> integrated as payload " . I hope it doesn't mean that Tianocore will > >>>> become the default payload, since there are ideological/technical > >>>> reasons against this ( I think there's a significant overlap between > >>>> the groups of people who love / interested in coreboot and hate UEFI ) > >>> > >>> > >>> the change could be reworded better I think: instead of the stable tag > for Tianocore being pulled from the upstream edk2 github repo and a series > of patches applied, it's now pulled directly from my fork/repo, which is > actually functional on most (x86_64) devices. A few tweaks (like > customizable boot splash) were added as well. > >>> > >>> there is no change to the default payload, only to the defaults for > Tianocore > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org > >>> To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > > coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org >
_______________________________________________ coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org
