Hi, > > Which is why I spent the time to enable CSM in the first place, of > > course. Not to mention the fact that having OVMF+CSM as a default > > firmware will serve to accelerate adoption of UEFI in virtual machines, > > and that gives people a *really* easy playground to get involved in EDK2 > > source code; fixing bugs and making improvements. > > Making OVMF more widely available would probably attract more users, yes > (and if we were forced to provide only one image in some distribution, > then including the CSM could contribute to that).
More pressing than solving the CSM+S3 is to tackle the *censored-four-letter-word-here* FAT licensing issue. With that fixed we can simply ship ovmf with fedora, instead of telling people "oh, you need this extra package from that extra repo ...". IMO this is the biggest stumbling block in widespread UEFI adoption in (qemu/kvm) virtual machines: virt-manager simply can't offer UEFI on a out-of-the-box fedora install today. David, I vaguely remember you had some plans/ideas on the fat issue. So, if you have some spare cycles for ovmf atm I'd suggest to look into that before fixing s3 with csm present. thanks, Gerd ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free." http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel
