On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 9:32 AM, ron minnich rminnich@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Peter Stuge peter@stuge.se wrote:
Ron,
ron minnich wrote:
pose the question absent any thought to what might happen at some future time?
I think coreboot has had BY FAR enough of thoughtless action.
So I'll rephrase.
"pose the question absent a bunch of bootless speculation about what might happen at some future time?"
BTW, on reflection, I'm fine with http://review.coreboot.org/#/c/7149/.
Based on the community feedback and this email discussion, isolation of the PI and AGESA source is the preferred development path. While we were trying for a common interface, it is not necessary. I concede that AMD has not contributed updates to AGESA releases and has had poor community interactions. It should be more beneficial to the development of coreboot to fix the long standing issues in the code. I have removed my NACK(-2) on 7149 and it should be un-abandoned. Thanks to each of you to your contributions and improvements to coreboot.
Regards, Marc