On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 05:56:28PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 06/20/2012 04:13 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
> >> Stop right there. That's just not going to happen, sorry. You aren't
> >> going to be able to get a user to replace their BIOS, nor should you
> >> ever want to. You are not going to be
Peter, thanks for the detailed email. I have a few questions.
1. As far as I know, Das U-Boot and Core Boot are mutually exclusive.
Why should Linux distribution developers want to use Core Boot instead
of Das U-Boot?
2. It seems to me that you do not need any Linux code. Exactly what is
the relat
On 06/20/2012 05:09 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>> Technical hurdles will likely prevent this unless we an get vendors to
>> release documentation. Is there any chance you could contact people at
>> Intel requesting programming documentation on their memory controller
>> and anything else we would need to w
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 04:35:41PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 06/20/2012 04:20 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 04:13:46PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
> >> On 06/20/2012 04:08 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 06:11:46PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
> I know that th
On 06/20/2012 04:20 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 04:13:46PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>> On 06/20/2012 04:08 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 06:11:46PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
I know that there is a great deal of discussion on the effect that
UEFI Secure B
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 04:13:46PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 06/20/2012 04:08 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 06:11:46PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
> >> I know that there is a great deal of discussion on the effect that
> >> UEFI Secure Boot will have on us. As far as I know, Sec
On 06/20/2012 04:08 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 06:11:46PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>> I know that there is a great deal of discussion on the effect that
>> UEFI Secure Boot will have on us. As far as I know, Secure Boot is
>> implemented in the UEFI firmware and if we replace the
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 06:11:46PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
> I know that there is a great deal of discussion on the effect that
> UEFI Secure Boot will have on us. As far as I know, Secure Boot is
> implemented in the UEFI firmware and if we replace the firmware,
> Secure Boot issues disappear.
Hi, I have about 11 years of experience with coreboot. I got
involved while developing a custom BIOS for an embedded system.
You may already have caught some presentation I or one of the other
developers have made about the project. There's a bunch of links
over at http://www.coreboot.org/Screensh
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 06/19/2012 09:25 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> We would gain a faster boot process. We would also enable people to
> avoid paying money for keys that can be revoked without a refund.
>
While I have no doubt that a determined team could make a f
On 06/19/2012 09:25 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> In theory, the kernel could be modified to only execute signed binaries
>> and portage could be modified to produce signed binaries. The user could
>> build a system that required everything to be signed with the private
>> key of his choice. A hardene
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 06/19/2012 08:22 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> Core Boot is a Linux distribution. I do not think that we should boot
> Gentoo using their distribution any more than we boot Gentoo using RHEL.
Well, maybe it is a distro in the sense that genkern
On 06/19/2012 08:22 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
>> I know that the Core Boot project also tries to accomplish this, but
their development process is slow and their approach seems to make the
boot process more complicated than it needs to be. Since
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
> I know that the Core Boot project also tries to accomplish this, but their
> development process is slow and their approach seems to make the boot process
> more complicated than it needs to be. Since Secure Boot will force us to
> flash our
I know that there is a great deal of discussion on the effect that UEFI Secure
Boot will have on us. As far as I know, Secure Boot is implemented in the UEFI
firmware and if we replace the firmware, Secure Boot issues disappear. With
that in mind, I believe we can solve the Secure Boot problem b
15 matches
Mail list logo
