On Thu, 2018-04-05 at 11:34 -0500, Matt DeVillier wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Nico Huber <nic...@gmx.de> wrote:
> > On 05.04.2018 18:15, Matt DeVillier wrote:
> > > my instinct is to put it in the 3rd party blobs repo, since it's
> > added to
> > > the CBFS w/o modification (ie, is treated like a blob), unlike
> > the SPD hex
> > > files which are selectively ordered and assembled into the
> > spd.bin (ie,
> > > treated as source).
> > 
I would like to see them in 3rd party repo, as we don't process them,
as Matt pointed out.

> > Files are concatenated, I don't see how this is treating sth. as
> > source.
> > 
They are changed from ASCII/text to binary format, so yes it's a source
file.
> > >
> > > For the example case you sited of users building coreboot images
> > for
> > > Chromebooks (eg), they still need numerous other platform/device
> > specific
> > > blobs (ie, FSP), so having the vbt alone in the main repo is
> > really not of
> > > any consequence.
> > 
> > That's very wrong. For instance I would have added Skylake+
> > backlight
> > support to coreboot over a year ago if the information wasn't
> > hidden in
> > a secret lair. Not having information published early and
> > conveniently
> > accessible is always of consequence. You might just not know in
> > what
> > ways yet. ;)
> 
> I meant having the vbt in the main repo vs blobs repo wasn't of any
> consequence
> for building upstream coreboot images, given that other blobs are
> still needed.
> But agree that either location is better than none :)
>  
> > > I'd also like to see those other required blobs in the
> > > 3rd party blobs repo, but that's an entirely separate issue :)
> > 
> > True.
> > 
> > Nico
> 
> 
Patrick

-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Reply via email to