On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 08:02:14PM +0200, Alexander Bluhm wrote: > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 05:54:35PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > Should we also fix biosboot? The machines that are affected are all > > fairly recent and should boot using UEFI by default... > > If we change fewer things, we may have less trouble for 6.4 and 6.5 > errata. > > Do we know any non-UEFI capable machines with huge firmware? > Does boot on BIOS machines have enough memory to handle huge firmware? > > > I have no clue if/how this should be handled as an errata/syspatch. > > I think we should include this into errata. Otherwise x280 and > similar machines would not get new firmware. > > First we need a diff for 6.5 and 6.5. exec_i386.c is based on > recent refactoring. > > Can we explain users to run installboot in errata description? > Do they know which boot disk to give on the command line? > > Can syspatch handle calling installboot? > Can it autodetect the boot disk device?
Do we really need to do that? I think all these laptops should have updates for the BIOS. I think it would be the better option to tell people to update the BIOS instead of doing a bootloader update in syspatch. In the end if the update is not installed then the fall back code will be used which is maybe not optimal but should also work. -- :wq Claudio
