-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/22/2016 12:33 AM, Raptor Engineering Automated Coreboot Test Stand
wrote:
> The ASUS KGPE-D16 fails verification as of commit
> e9995f1469504a61ba548f29fb16dc32cf9a3dea
>
> The following tests failed:
> BOOT_FAILURE
>
> Commits since last
Hi,
Please find the latest report on new defect(s) introduced to coreboot found
with Coverity Scan.
7 new defect(s) introduced to coreboot found with Coverity Scan.
1 defect(s), reported by Coverity Scan earlier, were marked fixed in the recent
build analyzed by Coverity Scan.
New defect(s)
Dear coreboot folks,
Am Sonntag, den 10.01.2016, 13:40 +0100 schrieb Paul Menzel:
> on the ASRock E350M1, I lately noticed that the SeaBIOS banner takes
> longer to appear. And looking at the logs board status [1], the time
> stamps stored in CBMEM confirm this.
>
> ```
> $ grep 1st
On 01/22/2016 08:21 AM, Patrick Georgi wrote:
> I'm uneasy
> with recommending that when not strictly necessary (I'd consider a
> project that's based on "or later" licensing to be such a case).
I'm not sure if you mean "something I'm uneasy about", or "an example
I'd consider" when you say
The ASUS KFSN4-DRE fails verification as of commit
9cfb40adb72b34d55e8eee70f54152ca942810cf
The following tests failed:
DMESG_ACCESS_FAILURE
ACPI_DSDT_ACCESS_FAILURE
ACPI_SSDT_ACCESS_FAILURE
Commits since last successful test:
See attached log for details
This message was automatically
2016-01-22 17:01 GMT+01:00 Alex G. :
> so that GPLv3 projects (e.g. SeaBIOS) may take code from coreboot where needed
They don't even accept code under BSD type licenses.
Patrick
--
Google Germany GmbH, ABC-Str. 19, 20354 Hamburg
Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB
To add:
2016-01-22 17:01 GMT+01:00 Alex G. :
> I think this would be a good move for interoperability, so that GPLv3
> projects (e.g. SeaBIOS) may take code from coreboot where needed (e.g.
> device drivers). I'm strictly talking about listing the preferred
> license; it's
I think this would be a good move for interoperability, so that GPLv3
projects (e.g. SeaBIOS) may take code from coreboot where needed (e.g.
device drivers). I'm strictly talking about listing the preferred
license; it's still up to contributors whether they want v2 or v2+.
[1] Listed GPLv2+ as
2016-01-22 17:25 GMT+01:00 Alex G. :
> I'm not sure if you mean "something I'm uneasy about", or "an example
> I'd consider" when you say "project that's based on 'or later'". u-boot
> is v2+. Does that count?
I'd recommend u-boot to standardize on a v2+ template, yes. (not
9 matches
Mail list logo