Re: About firmware facilities

[Pavel Roskin]

On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 04:27 +0930, Brendan Trotter wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 1:02 AM, Robert Millan <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Well, you have the freedom to disagree with anything we do and bring your
> > customized GRUB to a different direction :-)
> >
> > Anyhow, my priority for GRUB is strong driver-based support.  We could 
> > recruit
> > someone to develop the framework in next year's GSoC (unless somebody steps
> > in, of course).
> 
> Why stop there?
> 
> If proprietory ethernet ROMs aren't good enough, then what about
> proprietory SCSI ROMs, and proprietory firmware/BIOS?

We are already doing it.  There is functional ATA support, USB support
is under development.  GRUB can serve as BIOS together with Coreboot.

> Surely a boot manager wouldn't be a good manager if it didn't include
> it's own replacements for all of these things; and perhaps it should
> also include it's own replacement for proprietory OS's too...
> 
> Why are you worrying about such silly things when the multi-boot
> specification (which actually is relevant) is still severely borked?

Patches are welcome.

> >  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
> >  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
> >  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."
> 
> Sigh. I think I understand now - lack of logical thinking leads to
> lack of rational behavior.

Ad hominem arguments are not welcome here.

-- 
Regards,
Pavel Roskin