We, the coreboot community, and those passionate about Free and Open
Source Software are passionate about more than just openess in software,
but also openess in hardware. We view the Chromebooks as a step in the
direction we've worked for over a decade to take. We would like to see a
chromebook which empathizes not only openess in hardware, and software,
but also presents an attractive device for everyday computing.
Although the curent line of Chromebooks is, from certain considerations,
an attractive lineup, we feel more should be done to align Chromebooks
with the desires and needs of our community. We value open firmware and
we find the current methodolgy of initializing Intel-based hardware
unsatisfactory. Components such as MRC and ME are still closed, and we,
as a community, are unable to tinker with them, nor can we be confident
that such components present no risks to the security of our systems and
to our privacy. The trend with Intel hardware is to close down even more
of the firmware, with FSP. We find this direction completely unacceptable.
We also feel that the current lineup of Chromebooks does not meet the
everyday computing needs of many of us. The keyboards on current
Chromebook models are small, and difficult to use in dimly lit places.
The quality of the displays is less than satisfactory, while the overall
performance of the Chromebooks could be improved to better suit those in
our community who make heavy use of computing resources.
We would like to see a Chromebook which solves all of the above issues.
Although we do not wish to impose a specific requirement for a midrange
Chromebook, we would like to mention some ideas that our community has
We note that AMD-based hardware is not plagued with the closeness that
Intel-based hardware exhibits. We also note that an AMD A10 mobile
processor costs about the same as the Celeron 2955U used in newer
Chromebooks. We feel that an A10 processor would solve the sub-par
performance of the current Chromebook lineup, and would eliminate many
of the proprietary code blobs that Intel systems have to ship with.
We note that the Pavilion Chromebook 14, a $300 Chromebook, comes with
an Innolux N140BGE display panel. This panel's quality is appalling at
best. We note that an AOU B140HAN01 panel provides a much better
resolution, and much improved viewing angles, with a more consistent and
pleasant color reproduction, while only costing $60 more than the N140BGE.
We note that most manufacturers which offer a backlit keyboard charge a
$30 fee for the upgrade from a regular keyboard.
We feel that the A10 processor, better display, and backlit keyboard
would produce a much better and sexier Chromebook than the Pavilion 14,
but would only increase the production cost by approximately $90. Even
if such a Chromebook were to retail for $450, it would be a great
device, meeting the needs of some of the most demanding members of our
We are, with great hopes and prayers, looking forward to being able to
purchase such a system in stores.
The coreboot community
Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me(a)gmail.com>
HOW TO add your signature to this petition?
Please reply to this email, and add your name and e-mail to it.
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 9:19 PM, David Hubbard
> Hi Ron,
> Is stackability or rack-mount also a plus?
minor plus, but I would like to be able to carry it around in a
backpack as well. So, small is best. In fact, the gizmosphere is near
ideal save the enet won't work :-(
> Any particular power requirements or limits?
the lower the better.
> I assume you've already looked at standard sizes like mini-ITX; can you
> clarify what rules that out?
They're kind of big. The gizmosphere is a better size.
fchmmr in the #coreboot chat offers to ship a Lenovo X60 to anyone
who is willing and able to debug an EC issue and come up with a
solution for it.
The trackpoint usually does not work with coreboot, but works
reliably with the factory BIOS. The issue has only been seen by
one other X60 user and only rarely. Most machines don't have this
The offer includes the X60 as well as shipping from the UK to you,
and fchmmr is also happy to help with testing on a second machine
which also reliably exhibits the problem.
The X60 is yours to keep once the problem has been fixed.
Quite likely this requires monitoring LPC communication with the H8 EC
to compare (timing of) what the factory BIOS with what coreboot does,
so if you're interested you need to have or be able to create some
means of monitoring LPC IO. That could be an expensive logic analyzer
or it could be free time, programmable logic, an FX2 chip and sigrok.
If this sounds like a fun project just for you please reply on list.
fchmmr would obviously like to be reassured that someone interested
in this offer will actually be able to succeed within some reasonable
timeframe, so write something to help accomplish that in your reply.
Is stackability or rack-mount also a plus?
Any particular power requirements or limits?
I assume you've already looked at standard sizes like mini-ITX; can you
clarify what rules that out?
Folks, I'm looking for a very small board with the following:
- x86_64, preferably with virtualization capability
- 4-8 G or so of memory
- intel e1000 or rtl8139 gige
- coreboot not required, but strongly desired
- serial port required
- graphics not required, and in fact discouraged, and if it's not
there I'm happy
- usb not required
- pcie slot desired, not required
- would be nice to have a case, but we can manage otherwise
if anybody has a suggestion please let me know.
We need several to run this: http://akaros.cs.berkeley.edu/akaros-web/news.php
A case would be nice.
TL;DR: Coreboot applied to the Conservancy and has been offered
membership. The FSA template should be reviewed by all interested
parties, and we need your help to draft three specific sections,
which are discussed in detail at the bottom of this email.
I am excited to inform you that Conservancy's Project Evaluation
Committee has approved Coreboot for membership in the Software Freedom
Conservancy. I apologize greatly for the long delay between your
application date and the date on which we offered you membership.
Conservancy does not offer membership until we're sure we can offer
services to the project.
The next step is to negotiate a formal agreement between the project and
the Conservancy, which is called a fiscal sponsorship agreement (FSA).
You can find a template of the agreement available on Conservancy's
website at: http://sfconservancy.org/members/apply/ConservancyFSATemplate.pdfhttp://sfconservancy.org/members/apply/conservancy-fsa-template.tex
Generally, Conservancy leaves it for the Coreboot community to decide
how you'd like to discuss the document internally. Note that signing
such an agreement is a big step for the project and you should consider
the agreement carefully, in whatever forum is most appropriate for your
community. Conservancy strongly suggests that a public discussion of
the FSA occur on the general discussion list for developers of your
project, which is why I've posted this information here on your public
Also cc'ed is Conservancy's "Project Intake group", which can be reached
by the alias <project-intake(a)sfconservancy.org> and is comprised of the
Bradley M. Kuhn, Tony Sebro, Jeremy Allison, Tom Callaway, Martin Michlmayr
All of us are members of Conservancy's Project Evaluation Committee and
will be happy to answer questions and you should also feel free to cc
that address, too, if you'd like, when asking questions.
Meanwhile, Conservancy's detailed discussion will be with the
application leads: Marc Jones, Ron Minnich, and Stefan Reinauer.
Ultimately, Conservancy will rely on the application leads to coordinate
the final details of the FSA with Conservancy.
Specifically, note that the FSA template is in fact, just that, a
template. Most notably, we'll need to figure out together two key terms
of the agreement:
(a) who the initial signatories should be (ideally it should include
anyone who has ever made substantial contributions to the project),
(b) who the Project Leadership Committee (PLC) should be, how it should
govern itself, and what it should be called. Note there are a few
examples in the FSA template of how other projects have done this, but
they are just guidelines, not choices. The most important thing is to
write something that describes the natural and existing leadership
structure of your project. Conservancy also is reluctant to accept
PLC's that have fewer than three members.
There are a few other minor issues that we've raised in a private thread
with the application leads.
Please note that this offer will expire six months after it is made. We
would be happy to extend that time constraint if we're in active
discussions with you about joining.
We look forward to Coreboot joining the Conservancy!
Bradley M. Kuhn, Executive Director, Software Freedom Conservancy
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 05:25:39PM +0000, Moore, Robert wrote:
> If there are still issues, please send the acpidump for the machine.
Maybe you want SSDT.dsl and DSDT.dsl as attachments and not inline?