[coreboot] coreboot engineer needed
scott at notabs.org
Fri Jan 10 00:16:51 CET 2014
David Hubbard [mailto:david.c.hubbard+coreboot at gmail.com] wrote:
]Without additional information about the following questions,
]the job offer misses some candidates. Still, in this economy,
]kudos for the offer.
I have never worked for Intel so I can only guess about
the job details. I suspect the creation of this position
is a consequence of coreboot now being the fastest growing
boot firmware used in the PC market:
The listing's incorrect capitalization of coreboot shows that
coreboot is a new thing to Intel managers. Intel has been
pushing for UEFI as the standard x86 boot firmware since
1999, so the recent success of coreboot (through chromebook)
has probably taken some Intel managers by surprise.
]1. What does "coreboot engineer" mean? An engineer who has
]experience with coreboot -- or an engineer who will be working
]openly, supporting the coreboot project, and contributing
]patches, source code, and documentation?
I can only guess about the job details. These job descriptions
often contain lots of cut and paste, and little proofreading.
At least this one lists "Demonstrated C coding skills". The
nearly universal use of "C/C++" in job advertisements is
annoying (in my opinion, C and C++ are quite different languages).
It is also odd to see a requirement for 5 years of UEFI or
coreboot experience. Probably some of both would be better,
given that the reference code must be packaged for both
UEFI and coreboot use.
]2. What legally binding signatures does the position require?
]For example, Intel has a standard NDA as well as several Trade
]Secret documents; please include an exhaustive list and highlight
]the agreements that will have a material affect on the engineer's
]efforts to improve http://www.coreboot.org/Binary_situation either
]during their free time after hours, or after they no longer work
]3. Will the position require the engineer to intermittently work
]with Microsoft products, outside of compatibility tests? Will the
]position require the engineer to work on open source projects that
]are incompatible with the GPLv3, specifically the non-Tivoization
]clause? Will the position require the engineer to support UEFI
I can't answer for Intel, but I really doubt any Microsoft OS
boot work is involved. The only Windows logo approved boot
method is UEFI. Intel already has a UEFI BIOS team to handle that.
Same for secure boot. I would be willing to bet that Intel wants
pure (UEFI free) coreboot here. Microsoft is the only company that
wants 'secure boot'. Google has their own security mechanisms that
seem to be getting the job done. Microsoft has UEFI.
]If you are not at liberty to discuss these kinds of details, it's fine.
]On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 7:37 AM, Scott Duplichan <scott at notabs.org> wrote:
More information about the coreboot