On 07.09.2013 11:33, Andrey Borzenkov wrote:
> So just use another environment block for untrusted variables, that's
> all. I do not see why any change in sources is required.
Trouble is that right now we unconditionally load all variables from
block, whether trusted or not. So by modifying untrust
Please update other install methods as well
On 07.09.2013 01:59, Jon McCune wrote:
> +pubkey_file_arg=""
> +if [ x"$pubkey_file_list" != x ]; then
> +for file in $pubkey_file_list; do
> + if [ ! -e "$file" ]; then
> +gettext_printf "Public key file %s not found.\n" "${file}" 1>&2
>
On 25.08.2013 15:05, Andrey Borzenkov wrote:
> +defaults to 32 for IPv4 address and 128 for IPv6 address. Router is
> identified
> +by @var{shortname} which can be used to remove it (@pxref{net_del_route}).
> +@end deffn
> +
Route, not router.
Other than this problem, go ahead.
signature.asc
De
Go ahead
On 18.07.2013 18:10, Aleš Nesrsta wrote:
> Hi,
>
> after some debugging I have found bug(s) in handling of QHs related to
> EHCI low speed split interrupt transfers.
>
> Attached patch seems to solve problem described below (non-working USB
> keyboard attached to the same port where was
В Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:18:55 +0200
Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko пишет:
> On 07.09.2013 11:33, Andrey Borzenkov wrote:
> > So just use another environment block for untrusted variables, that's
> > all. I do not see why any change in sources is required.
> Trouble is that right now we uncon
В Mon, 9 Sep 2013 08:34:10 -0700
Jonathan McCune пишет:
>
> > Now if you could come up with solution that maintains compatibility
> > with existing grub.cfg, that would be valid reason. But right now
> > grub.cfg must be changed anyway at which point just save untrusted
> > variables separately
On 16.09.2013 23:15, Jan Reiss wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> as more and more mainboards become dual bios compatible and are
> flashable online via flashrom.
> i thought it might be a good idea if grub could be compiled as option
> rom to be included into the standard bios firmware.
> Does anyone have
I was thinking that an empty whitelist should implicitly *allow* all. The
presence of one or more variables in the whitelist is a signal that the
user cares and explicitly disallows anything not in the whitelist. I think
this is totally compatible with any existing grub.cfg, unless somebody has
s
