Hello Patrick,
It seems that in current form not. But I am not Justice expert, and neither
lawyer, but I can ask. I will forward your email deeper in INTEL to (try to)
find answers. No promises.
Zoran
___
Most of The Time you should be intel inside to be capable to think out of
the box.
Hello Alex,
I am just trying to understand the main course you guys/maintainers will take
from here. It is not hard for me to tweak this what I see, and produce usable
loads which work... But I am not talking about me, rather about wide community
of developers which Coreboot supports.
It
Am 2013-12-06 12:03, schrieb John Lewis:
Although I'm not a developer as such, I would like to be able to
conribute by using this for the 3 models of Chromebook I have.
However, I don't have push rights to the board-status repo (according
to the script). Can you sort that out for me?
Set up an
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:35 PM, Gregg Levine gregg.drw...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello!
Gabe, you can't add that Both were destroyed, and the plans were
misplaced. We're looking into why they were misplaced.
Aaron a question. A reference platform is just that, a platform
created to test
The UEFI payload project I have been working on is usable now,
though it has been tested on a single board only (ASRock E350M1).
In a few days I will setup an AMD family 10h board and try it there.
Though true flash-backed NVRAM support has not been added yet,
it is quite usable with the emulated
Here are my thoughts on FSP.
FSP is how we deal with a bad situation: the fact that Intel chipsets
are no longer open (the way they were until 2000 or so) and require a
binary blob from Intel to get them working.
We have, as we can see, used several paths over the years to deal with
the binary
Am Freitag, den 06.12.2013, 10:04 -0600 schrieb Scott Duplichan:
The payload has been tested with major UEFI capable operating systems
(Ubuntu 13.10, Windows 7, Windows 8.1) on real E350M1 hardware and
it is working well.
http://notabs.org/coreboot/duet-payload/
Do you mind if I port this to
]Patrick Georgi wrote:
]
]Am Freitag, den 06.12.2013, 10:04 -0600 schrieb Scott Duplichan:
] The payload has been tested with major UEFI capable operating systems
] (Ubuntu 13.10, Windows 7, Windows 8.1) on real E350M1 hardware and
] it is working well.
]
]
On 06/12/13 11:54, Patrick Georgi wrote:
Am 2013-12-06 12:03, schrieb John Lewis:
Although I'm not a developer as such, I would like to be able to
conribute by using this for the 3 models of Chromebook I have.
However, I don't have push rights to the board-status repo (according
to the script).
On 30.11.2013 17:51, Chris Mailer wrote:
Hello Coreboot,
I would like to play around with Coreboot on a Lenovo X201i convertible
laptop.
According to http://www.coreboot.org/Supported_Motherboards#Laptops and
some wiki-entries Coreboot does do well on the X201. Does this imply
Coreboot
No.
Unless you have strong x86 firmware development background you can
spend n+5 years learning about the field, trying to port coreboot,
failing, developing some support tools, trying to port coreboot
again and finally maybe succeeding.
//Peter
--
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
Hi,
Thanks, I had something similar in my mind. Would it be possibe to combine the
new wiki page with old Board Information page? I mean the detailed page which
lists some quirks and todos..http://www.coreboot.org/ASUS_F2A85-M
Thanks
Rudolf
--
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
On 12/06/2013 05:21 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
No.
Unless you have strong x86 firmware development background you can
spend n+5 years learning about the field, trying to port coreboot,
failing, developing some support tools, trying to port coreboot
again and finally maybe succeeding.
That was
On 12/03/2013 11:37 AM, Dave Frodin wrote:
I'm seeing a problem building payloads. The problem is actually occuring
when libpayload gets built prior
to being copied down to the payload. I'm building a different payload,
but the problem can be seen
when building coreinfo. Here's the sequence I
14 matches
Mail list logo
