Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Richard Yao <ryao@g.o>
To: "gentoo-dev@l.g.o" <gentoo-dev@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Killing UEFI Secure Boot
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 00:26:46
On 06/21/2012 06:51 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Peter Stuge <peter@×××××.se> wrote: >> Roy Bamford wrote: >> >>> So when you build a dud kernel and flash your BIOS with it, and we >>> all build the odd dud, your motherboard is bricked. >> >> Any firmware modification has potential to brick, and shouldn't be >> done unless you are comfortable with the modification, or with >> solving a brick problem. :) > > So, why are we still going back and forth about this?
This idea has technical merit and it has sparked a very insightful discussion in which I learned many things that I did not know. My original intention in emailing the list was to learn such things, so my email has fulfilled its purpose. My email has also led to an interesting off list conversation between myself and Peter about this. I believe that the exchange of ideas that this prompted has been mutually beneficial. My hope is that our discussion catalyzes improvements in both Gentoo and coreboot. On 06/21/2012 06:51 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> we're a DISTRO - we integrate and ship what upstream gives us...
RHEL is a distribution, but I understand that RedHat does a great deal of upstream programming and is also upstream for some things. Do you consider it to be inappropriate for us to play a larger role in both upstream development and as upstream ourselves?


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Killing UEFI Secure Boot Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o>