On 02/05/16 13:18, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > Hi, > >> So, my question is: is this intended and supported behavior (that is, >> going from a Secure Boot-capable build to a Secure Boot-disabled build, >> while preserving the contents & functionality of the variables), or just >> a lucky coincidence that results from the design choices you made while >> unifying the variable drivers? > > Related followup question: If the driver can dynamically switch formats > now, is there any reason to ever create new varstores in the old format?
... Not only could this simplify packaging of binaries (because a single varstore template could be shared by the different binaries), but also OvmfPkg/VarStore.fdf.inc could be made independent of SECURE_BOOT_ENABLE. Thanks Laszlo _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
