From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1FcnWg-0005lQ-Ty for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 May 2006 13:58:38 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FcnWf-0005l6-CQ for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 May 2006 13:58:37 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FcnWe-0005kY-Dn for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 May 2006 13:58:36 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FcnWe-0005kQ-47 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 May 2006 13:58:36 -0400 Received: from [212.85.152.101] (helo=kotoba.storever.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FcnXI-0005EJ-OX for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 May 2006 13:59:16 -0400 Received: from kotoba.oasis.nexedi.com (kotoba.oasis.nexedi.com [212.85.152.101]) by kotoba.storever.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E2473C92DEEC for ; Sun, 7 May 2006 21:22:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [??1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kotoba.storever.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91A073C92DEEB for ; Sun, 7 May 2006 21:22:47 +0200 (CEST) From: "Yoshinori K. Okuji" Organization: enbug.org To: grub-devel@gnu.org Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 19:58:30 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200605071958.31434.okuji@enbug.org> X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.498625, version=0.17.2 Subject: firmware specification X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 17:58:37 -0000 So far, we've been using the triples (such as i386-pc-gnu) to specify both a CPU and a firmware. I feel that this is not appropriate. The vendor part of the triple can imply what firmware is used, but not always. So, for example, I invented i386-efi for EFI. Since the specification of the triple affects the choice of a compiler, I suspect that our usage is wrong. So I'd like to add a configuration option to specify a firmware type instead of using a vendor name. When the user does not specify her firmware explicitly, configure can guess the firmware from the CPU and the vendor. Is there any objection? Okuji