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 write a small OS that we could flash >> in place of UEFI? > > Again, see the response from Peter about what is needed here. That > "anything else" is not trivial. > > But feel free to prove me wrong, I love it when that happens :) > > greg k-h >
You must not have read this, where I said that I realized that this is infeasible: 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 able to keep up with the >> hundreds, if not thousands, of different motherboards being introduced >> every month, in order to just get rid of the secure boot option. > > OpenWRT does that with routers and Cyanogenmod does that with phones. It > seems reason for us to offer it as an option to users. With that said, > this probably won't happen. One of the Core Boot developers informed me > of what is involved in setting up the address space and it is infeasible > for us to do. >From what I can tell, the Core Boot developers could use that documentation. You yourself said "If there's anything that anyone is thinking I should be doing but seem not to be, please let me know.". Do you have any intention of acting on that?
