lerAsm.iii:313:
> error: invalid combination of opcode and operands
> /home/www/builds_xen_unstable/xen-src-8c8b6fb0-20160912/tools/firmware/ovmf-dir-remote/Build/OvmfX64/DEBUG_GCC44/X64/UefiCpuPkg/Library/CpuExceptionHandlerLib/DxeCpuExceptionHandlerLib/OUTPUT/X64/ExceptionHandlerAsm.iii:
ion: missing operator before {
> 0xE11FACA0, 0x4710, 0x4C8E, { 0xA7, 0xA2, 0x01, 0xBA, 0xA2, 0x59, 0x1B,
> 0x4C } }
>Near { 0xFFE06BDD, 0x6107, 0x46A6, { 0x7B, 0xB2, 0x5A, 0x9C,
> 0x7E, 0xC5, 0x27, 0x5C }}
>
That is not a common error. Can you attach you INF file? It sounds lik
and nice to have a pointer to it.
>
> Thanks for the pointers
>
This history of issues is why we should remove the binary FAT driver from the
common repo, so we accommodate the realities of all the down stream partners.
Thanks,
Andrew Fish
PS Nice to see the FOSS and traditional PC folks lea
ith some extensive search one can find a workable driver. Or
> for example Apple could just contribute theirs as BSD licensed.
>
They are talking about an EFI FAT driver with a BSD compatible license, not a
BSD driver.
The edk2 EFI FAT driver has a license that matches the FAT32 spec it was coded
against, but that license restricts the usage of the code to EFI. This is not
deemed a GPL compatible license, so that causes issues with down stream GPL
projects of the edk2 as there is a binary for the EFI FAT driver checked into
the main branch of the edk2. The source to the edk2 EFI FAT driver is separate
from the edk2 based on its funky license.
Thanks,
Andrew Fish
>
> Alex
___
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
> On Sep 9, 2015, at 11:19 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>
>
>> Am 10.09.2015 um 07:32 schrieb Jordan Justen :
>>
>> On 2015-09-09 20:26:54, Andrew Fish wrote:
>>>> On Sep 9, 2015, at 5:41 PM, Jordan Justen
>>>> wrote:
>>>&g
> On Sep 9, 2015, at 5:41 PM, Jordan Justen wrote:
>
> On 2015-09-09 16:05:20, Andrew Fish wrote:
>>
>>> On Sep 9, 2015, at 3:24 PM, Jordan Justen wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2015-09-09 12:11:26, El-Haj-Mahmoud, Samer wrote:
>>>> The recent ex
some kind of
civil disobedience. it does not mater what license you strap on the code the
the device makers still have to “pay the man”.
Thanks,
Andrew Fish
PS As I stated before I’m fine removing all the binaries from the main repo, as
you don’t really want binaries in your producti
> On Sep 9, 2015, at 10:57 AM, Jordan Justen wrote:
>
> On 2015-09-09 10:04:50, Andrew Fish wrote:
>>
>>> On Sep 9, 2015, at 9:17 AM, Jordan Justen wrote:
>>>
>>> So, related to this, I wonder how the community would feel about a
>>>
ion about upcoming changes that break compatibility between different
projects. So the solution is to keep everything in the tree working on master.
We should fix the edk2 process, and place a process in place to communicate
pending non backward compatible changes in the edk2 to down stream consumer
the dependent ACPI table installation as well,
> before we go to the kernel.
>
> One idea could be to signal EFI_EVENT_GROUP_READY_TO_BOOT ourselves,
That sounds like the right thing to do.
> before booting the kernel; however this event group seems quite tied to
> the Boot Manage
10 matches
Mail list logo
