Hi, what is the situation with 855 again? I think someone is sort-of working on it for one system.
Joseph, was it you?
//Peter
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 15:56:25 +0100, Peter Stuge peter@stuge.se wrote:
Hi, what is the situation with 855 again? I think someone is sort-of working on it for one system.
Joseph, was it you?
I'm going to be working on the i854 which is simular. I'm just really busy working on some things that could potentially be very cool for all Intel graphics chipsets. I think Stefan put the i855gme code out there because he didn't want to see it go waste, I don't think there is a board that uses it? As far as the i855pm, not sure on that?
This weekend the Free Software Foundation is holding its annual associates meeting in Cambridge, Mass. Since they are mainly interested in software issues, this project might not interest them.
Anyway, the question is: Which board is best for coreboot ?
http://groups.fsf.org/index.php/Project_Suggestion_for_an_Open_Machine
See www.fsf.org for more details about the meeting.
Bob
On 19.03.2009 18:55, Robert Vogel wrote:
This weekend the Free Software Foundation is holding its annual associates meeting in Cambridge, Mass. Since they are mainly interested in software issues, this project might not interest them.
Anyway, the question is: Which board is best for coreboot ?
Best according to which metric? No closed source option ROMs? All features working as well as with proprietary BIOS? Support for Windows (after all, limiting a board to Linux only would make it non-free)?
http://groups.fsf.org/index.php/Project_Suggestion_for_an_Open_Machine
Two things strike me as rather odd: - The FSF (or at least RMS) have demanded machines with completely free firmware although the page suggests that never happened. - The freeappliances.org page linked from the FSF Open Machine Project page makes some rather questionable, confusing and incorrect claims. If you have write rights to the FSF page you mentioned, please remove that link to "related ideas". While probably not intended to be harmful, it will confuse anyone trying to learn about building/using machines without closed source code.
Regards, Carl-Daniel
Hi Carl-Daniel,
I'm just looking for a simple desktop solution that has as few 'closed' components as possible. Enough so that it can be more trustworthy.
Last year I wrote the related page, so it isn't up to date. Correct me on the points that bother you though and I'll fix it.
My question remains, which 64-bit, coreboot board would be best for a fully functional desktop ? Would you expect trouble with it ?
Bob
----- Original Message ----- From: "Carl-Daniel Hailfinger" c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net To: "Robert Vogel" vogel@ct.metrocast.net Cc: coreboot@coreboot.org Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 2:30 PM Subject: Re: [coreboot] Your Opinion: The Best Board for coreboot ?
On 19.03.2009 18:55, Robert Vogel wrote:
This weekend the Free Software Foundation is holding its annual associates meeting in Cambridge, Mass. Since they are mainly interested in software issues, this project might not interest them.
Anyway, the question is: Which board is best for coreboot ?
Best according to which metric? No closed source option ROMs? All features working as well as with proprietary BIOS? Support for Windows (after all, limiting a board to Linux only would make it non-free)?
http://groups.fsf.org/index.php/Project_Suggestion_for_an_Open_Machine
Two things strike me as rather odd:
- The FSF (or at least RMS) have demanded machines with completely free
firmware although the page suggests that never happened.
- The freeappliances.org page linked from the FSF Open Machine Project
page makes some rather questionable, confusing and incorrect claims. If you have write rights to the FSF page you mentioned, please remove that link to "related ideas". While probably not intended to be harmful, it will confuse anyone trying to learn about building/using machines without closed source code.
Regards, Carl-Daniel
-- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
Hi Robert,
On 19.03.2009 19:58, Robert Vogel wrote:
Hi Carl-Daniel,
I'm just looking for a simple desktop solution that has as few 'closed' components as possible. Enough so that it can be more trustworthy.
Last year I wrote the related page, so it isn't up to date. Correct me on the points that bother you though and I'll fix it.
Sorry, no offense intended.
Here is the (incomplete) list of errors in the BIOS section.
I am not aware of single motherboard manufacturer that offers an open source BIOS.
Tyan offers boards with coreboot. Silicon Mechanics offers boards with coreboot (though not necessarily boards manufactured by them).
The most likely vendors (Tyan and Giga) have no interest in allowing a substitute BIOS.
See above.
The Free Software Foundation is working on it
No.
It is not practical, right now, for a personal computer.
Works for quite a few boards in the consumer range.
The Free Software Foundation has listed motherboards http://linuxbios.org/index.php/Supported_Motherboards [11]
No, it's the coreboot project/group. The FSF has nothing to do with it.
It has two Free & Open Source BIOS: One, thanks to AMD engineer Yinghai Lu who released GPL-licensed code, and the other is from *LinuxBIOS*, a Free Software project.
Really? Yinghai contributed his code to coreboot. Only one implementation.
The modifications and determination of payload are, I think, challenging.
It depends on what you want. SeaBIOS is pretty much what everyone wants nowadays.
The FSF page makes this quite clear.
coreboot, not FSF.
It comes in about 4 different forms, one with SPI.
No. Two with SPI.
LinuxBIOS runs on many embedded boards, for example the [...] OLPC "XO" laptop ([6] laptop.org) .
No longer on the OLPC.
My question remains, which 64-bit, coreboot board would be best for a fully functional desktop ?
The Asus M2V-MX SE. It even works without a video BIOS, giving you probably the most free solution with integrated graphics and 64bit.
Would you expect trouble with it ?
No board is completely tested. There will always be some corner case that is untested and/or not working yet. That even applies to proprietary BIOS.
If you have no way to recover from a bad flash, you should not reflash or update any BIOS, regardless of whether it is open source or not.
Regards, Carl-Daniel
P.S. RMS thinks a closed source BIOS is OK as long as it is stored in a real non-reflashable ROM because it is no longer software but hardware.
Thank you for your help Carl-Daniel,
I haven't yet updated, but I'm noticing that the Asus M2V-MX SE doesn't seem to be available at any of the major outlets...
Would this be ok ? http://bytecom.stores.yahoo.net/giganvnf57ch.html
Is there another one you could recommend ?
Bob
----- Original Message ----- From: "Carl-Daniel Hailfinger" c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net To: "Robert Vogel" vogel@ct.metrocast.net Cc: coreboot@coreboot.org Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 3:39 PM Subject: Re: [coreboot] Your Opinion: The Best Board for coreboot ?
Hi Robert,
On 19.03.2009 19:58, Robert Vogel wrote:
Hi Carl-Daniel,
I'm just looking for a simple desktop solution that has as few 'closed' components as possible. Enough so that it can be more trustworthy.
Last year I wrote the related page, so it isn't up to date. Correct me on the points that bother you though and I'll fix it.
Sorry, no offense intended.
Here is the (incomplete) list of errors in the BIOS section.
I am not aware of single motherboard manufacturer that offers an open source BIOS.
Tyan offers boards with coreboot. Silicon Mechanics offers boards with coreboot (though not necessarily boards manufactured by them).
The most likely vendors (Tyan and Giga) have no interest in allowing a substitute BIOS.
See above.
The Free Software Foundation is working on it
No.
It is not practical, right now, for a personal computer.
Works for quite a few boards in the consumer range.
The Free Software Foundation has listed motherboards http://linuxbios.org/index.php/Supported_Motherboards [11]
No, it's the coreboot project/group. The FSF has nothing to do with it.
It has two Free & Open Source BIOS: One, thanks to AMD engineer Yinghai Lu who released GPL-licensed code, and the other is from *LinuxBIOS*, a Free Software project.
Really? Yinghai contributed his code to coreboot. Only one implementation.
The modifications and determination of payload are, I think, challenging.
It depends on what you want. SeaBIOS is pretty much what everyone wants nowadays.
The FSF page makes this quite clear.
coreboot, not FSF.
It comes in about 4 different forms, one with SPI.
No. Two with SPI.
LinuxBIOS runs on many embedded boards, for example the [...] OLPC "XO" laptop ([6] laptop.org) .
No longer on the OLPC.
My question remains, which 64-bit, coreboot board would be best for a fully functional desktop ?
The Asus M2V-MX SE. It even works without a video BIOS, giving you probably the most free solution with integrated graphics and 64bit.
Would you expect trouble with it ?
No board is completely tested. There will always be some corner case that is untested and/or not working yet. That even applies to proprietary BIOS.
If you have no way to recover from a bad flash, you should not reflash or update any BIOS, regardless of whether it is open source or not.
Regards, Carl-Daniel
P.S. RMS thinks a closed source BIOS is OK as long as it is stored in a real non-reflashable ROM because it is no longer software but hardware.
-
Carl-Daniel Hailfinger -
Joseph Smith -
Peter Stuge -
Robert Vogel