From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Graf Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2015 09:53:22 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/9] EFI payload / application support In-Reply-To: <20151225032939.GA4093@bill-the-cat> References: <1450792676-109541-1-git-send-email-agraf@suse.de> <20151225032939.GA4093@bill-the-cat> Message-ID: <567D0402.6040606@suse.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 25.12.15 04:29, Tom Rini wrote: > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 02:57:47PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: > >> This is my Christmas present for my openSUSE friends :). >> >> U-Boot is a great project for embedded devices. However, convincing >> everyone involved that only for "a few oddball ARM devices" we need to >> support different configuration formats from grub2 when all other platforms >> (PPC, System Z, x86) are standardized on a single format is a nightmare. >> >> So we started to explore alternatives. At first, people tried to get >> grub2 running using the u-boot api interface. However, FWIW that one >> doesn't support relocations, so you need to know where to link grub2 to >> at compile time. It also seems to be broken more often than not. And on >> top of it all, it's a one-off interface, so yet another thing to maintain. >> >> That led to a nifty idea. What if we can just implement the EFI application >> protocol on top of U-Boot? Then we could compile a single grub2 binary for >> uEFI based systems and U-Boot based systems and as soon as that one's loaded, >> everything looks and feels (almost) the same. >> >> This patch set is the result of pursuing this endeavor. > > So, I owe the whole codebase a real review. My very quick question > however is, aside from what you had to borrow from wine, can you license > everything else as GPL v2 or later rather than LGPL? I'm personally a pretty big fan of the LGPL, since it's a very reasonable compromise between closed and open source IMHO ;). Is there a particular reason you're asking for this? LGPL code is fully compatible with GPL code and the resulting binary would be GPL anyway because FWIW you can't compile U-Boot without GPL code inside. Alex