I agree with you very much. On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 5:14 AM, Jordan Crouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 30/06/08 13:18 -0400, Joseph Smith wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:28:37 +0200, Ward Vandewege <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 10:18:47AM -0400, Joseph Smith wrote: > > >> > > >> Maybe it is just me, but it seems like lately there have been a lot of > > >> posts to the mailing list about, coreboot not supporting ANY Intel > > >> chipsets/cpu's. Is there rumors spreading around the mill??? If so we > > > need > > >> to nip this in the bud, this is probably discouraging people that want > > > to > > >> get involved with coreboot. > > > > > > Well - look at it from the other perspective. Intel's being difficult. > > The > > > more obvious that becomes, the more they will be encouraged to change > > > their > > > ways and become more friendly and open. > > > > > I don't think spreading the word that coreboot does not support anything > > Intel is a positive way to accomplish anything. It just frustrates and > > discourages people willing to get involved. We have to face the facts > here, > > Intel may never get involved with coreboot, so the next best thing is to > > get as many developers involved willing to take the time to fill in the > > missing pieces of code. Thinking ouside of the box. This is what I did > for > > the i830, It might have taken me a little longer, but in the long run I > did > > it without any help from Intel (except for one public datasheet). > > Honesty is the best (and only) practice here. Firmware development > is hard - exceedingly hard, and thats with copious amounts of > documentation. Without documentation, it becomes nearly impossible. > Somebody look at the Barcelona memory initialization code and tell > me they could have figured it out on their own. I'm thinking not. > > So we have to be blatantly obvious about what our shortcomings are. > You can believe all you want in the power of open source, but the > truth of the matter is that 90% of all the people who come on this list > to ask for a particular port are not interested in doing the work > themselves, and the precious few that are willing to do the work need to > be told right up front what they are facing. They need to know what > NDAs they need to secure, what code distribution rights they need to > ask for, and just how difficult this work really is, especially in the > cpu/* and northbridge/* directories. > > Thats not to say that people shouldn't be encouraged to ask the right > questions - if enough people ask a vendor for datasheets, it might > have a positive effect. But acting as though we are not developing > from behind the eight ball is going to give everybody the wrong impression, > and it will result in even more upset feelings then if we just told them > right off the bat that they are asking for something that probably isn't > going to happen. > > And just in case this sounds like I'm bashing the competition, know that > my own company is in the same boat. We have yet to release the datasheet > for the SB600, and until we do, I'm going to be the first to tell the > honest truth if somebody asks for it. > > Jordan > > > -- > coreboot mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot > -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Homepage: http://starliu.9966.org, about Buddha, x86_64 CPU, Debian GNU/Linux Lenny AMD64, UEFI/BIOS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- coreboot mailing list [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
