Re: [coreboot] Coreboot Purism BIOS is free? open?

On Sat, Dec 23, 2017 at 11:32 PM, taii...@gmx.com wrote: > On 12/23/2017 07:16 PM, Todd Weaver wrote: > >> Intel did not mislead, we told them, and continue to, that we _want_ an >> ME-less design (which is their term for what we asked for). And as we >> grow our leverage will

Re: [coreboot] Coreboot Purism BIOS is free? open?

On 12/23/2017 07:16 PM, Todd Weaver wrote: Intel did not mislead, we told them, and continue to, that we _want_ an ME-less design (which is their term for what we asked for). And as we grow our leverage will grow, and our influence will grow. This is a long-term strategy and is playing out as

Re: [coreboot] Coreboot Purism BIOS is free? open?

On 12/23/2017 04:08 PM, Ivan Ivanov wrote: Sadly the ARM processor also have the ME-like backdoor (called "TrustZone). And even MIPS is going this road soon (check out the "MIPS OmniShield" news). Could it be the requirement of US Government - for all the consumer CPU to have backdoors ? My

Re: [coreboot] AMD "pre-PSP" devices

On 12/23/2017 04:50 PM, eche...@free.fr wrote: (was [coreboot] Coreboot Purism BIOS is free? open?) Regarding the "AMD pre-PSP" devices, I have a very naive question : are some of them still in production or none of them? (i.e all one can buy nowadays are only "pre-owned" devices with a life

Re: [coreboot] Coreboot Purism BIOS is free? open?

> Intel did not mislead, we told them, and continue to, that we _want_ an > ME-less design (which is their term for what we asked for). This is Mission Impossible. The reasons are Technical (bringing up the platform) and Political => Sales and Marketing domination/implications. > And as we grow

Re: [coreboot] Coreboot Purism BIOS is free? open?

On Fri, 2017-12-22 at 22:06 -0500, Youness Alaoui wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Timothy Pearson > wrote: > > > > Thank you for the detailed explanation. I guess this is an area in > > which experience matters; it is absolutely unacceptable (and not >

Re: [coreboot] Coreboot Purism BIOS is free? open?

On Sat, 2017-12-23 at 11:39 +0100, Nico Huber wrote: > If you get the i.MX8 for it (and it turns out to be as good > documented), all you have to do is to ask for a board with the most > powerful version that physically fits a Librem 13 [1]. Then you can > offer trustworthy hardware vs.

Re: [coreboot] Coreboot Purism BIOS is free? open?

Ivan Ivanov wrote: > Could it be the requirement of US Government - for all the consumer > CPU to have backdoors ? I guess that the private sector is a much stronger force... Nico Huber wrote: > watch Netflix in high resolution //Peter -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org

[coreboot] AMD "pre-PSP" devices

(was [coreboot] Coreboot Purism BIOS is free? open?) Regarding the "AMD pre-PSP" devices, I have a very naive question : are some of them still in production or none of them? (i.e all one can buy nowadays are only "pre-owned" devices with a life expectancy far less than that of a new one..) What

Re: [coreboot] Coreboot Purism BIOS is free? open?

On 23.12.2017 22:08, Ivan Ivanov wrote: > Sadly the ARM processor also have the ME-like backdoor (called "TrustZone). Some have. Some not. Some have it and it's owner-controllable. It's not about the ISA and some optional architectural feature, it's about the chip you buy. > And even MIPS is

Re: [coreboot] Coreboot Purism BIOS is free? open?

Sadly the ARM processor also have the ME-like backdoor (called "TrustZone). And even MIPS is going this road soon (check out the "MIPS OmniShield" news). Could it be the requirement of US Government - for all the consumer CPU to have backdoors ? My last hopes are on POWER 9 and RISC V now ;

Re: [coreboot] ThinkPad X201 compile error

On 23.12.2017 17:12, Federico Amedeo Izzo wrote: This attempt was not a success, because even with the last working commit, when selecting "Normal" mode via nvramcui, it always reboots in Fallback mode. You also need to clear the `reboot_counter` variable. Otherwise the logic assumes "Normal"

Re: [coreboot] ThinkPad X201 compile error

On 12/18/2017 12:14 PM, Nico Huber wrote: > On 18.12.2017 11:44, Federico Amedeo Izzo wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I wanted to update coreboot on my X201 from the Feb 2017 source >> (commit 068edc1c52cb1e5b6376ba7f296ef8797a24cd5f) >> to current master >> (commit

Re: [coreboot] cbfstool without cloning the whole repository? Use script for <2M download

It looks like there were two typos in this wonderful script : missing " \ " at the end of two " --execute robots=off " lines Other than that, this script is still working. Below is a fixed copy, if you sometimes need cbfstool without cloning the whole coreboot you may try it out: ### SCRIPT

Re: [coreboot] Coreboot Purism BIOS is free? open?

On 12/23/2017 11:54 AM, Nico Huber wrote: > On 23.12.2017 11:39, Nico Huber wrote: >> [1] I'm convinced that this is easily doable. At least compared to the >> effort you already put in liberating the unliberatable. If the i.MX8 >> turns out to be as controllable and well documented as

Re: [coreboot] Coreboot Purism BIOS is free? open?

On 23.12.2017 11:39, Nico Huber wrote: > [1] I'm convinced that this is easily doable. At least compared to the > effort you already put in liberating the unliberatable. If the i.MX8 > turns out to be as controllable and well documented as the i.MX6, > you'd be catapulted towards the

Re: [coreboot] Coreboot Purism BIOS is free? open?

Hey Youness, hey Todd, On 23.12.2017 04:06, Youness Alaoui wrote: > I think there is a plan to move librems to non-x86 architecture > eventually (considering that RYF is our long term plan, there is no > choice in moving out of x86 eventually), that would be great. > I think the efforts on the

Re: [coreboot] T430 fan control

Hello David, >> however it seems the fan control does not >> work for me. The fan spins but at a low >> speed, and does not increase even if I run a >> stresstest like 'stress --cpu 4'. Maybe you try to install tlp in dom0: