How would I make a non-Shell UEFI app then (for example, a boot loader)?
From: Mcdaniel, Daryl [mailto:daryl.mcdan...@intel.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 2:35 PM
To: edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [edk2] DevShell absence causes silent failures
Tim,
You raise some valid points, and they are being addressed.
For the short term, would you feel that making DevShell resident by default
(just like DevConsole is) to be an acceptable solution?
Sincerely,
Daryl McDaniel
________________________________
From: Tim Lewis [mailto:tim.le...@insyde.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 2:17 PM
To: edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: [edk2] DevShell absence causes silent failures
I was discussing an issue where fopen() worked for me but didn't work for
another developer. Same .C code. Built beautifully. He eventually tracked it
down that he did not have DevShell in his application's INF. Everything built
just fine, because this lib only exports a constructor and destructor, but the
application failed (because the shell devices weren't registered). Difficult to
debug.
I understand that the Shell and non-Shell apps can expose different types of
devices. But it is not intuitive. Why not create two application classes
(StdLib and StdLibUefi and even StdLibDxe)?
Regards,
Tim
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't let slow site performance ruin your business. Deploy New Relic APM
Deploy New Relic app performance management and know exactly
what is happening inside your Ruby, Python, PHP, Java, and .NET app
Try New Relic at no cost today and get our sweet Data Nerd shirt too!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel
