On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Anthony Liguori <anth...@codemonkey.ws> wrote: > OVMF is proprietary.
I don't agree that not-OSI means proprietary. I agree that the FAT driver is not 'free software' and I agree that is a problem for usage with free software projects, such as QEMU. This is a big deal, but unfortunately, as an Intel employee, I think I've done as much as I can to address this. It couldn't hurt if more people that actually care about this spoke up on edk2-devel about the issue, or perhaps within a UEFI working group. Because, I know that they've stopped listening to me about it. > It is not "supported" by QEMU. No, but I've always thought that QEMU was happy to have alternative firmware projects. > I'm not really convinced that > QEMU<->firmware is a GPL boundary because of how tightly the two are > linked. Where has 'linked' in terms of the GPL ever been anything other than actual executable linking? > Moving large chunks of firmware code into QEMU just to avoid solving > licensing issues is a non-starter with me. Is this a licensing issue? I thought this was a "let's save time by doing it in one place" thing. I'm pretty ambivalent about this feature, really. I don't think it is even worth all this bickering. I'm certain OVMF has ACPI issues on QEMU, but I don't think it is a huge deal to resolve them independently of this feature. I was not a huge fan of supporting this type of thing for Xen in OVMF, but it does seem to work fine. -Jordan