On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 09:05:37AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Fri, 15 May 2026 at 08:10, Tom Rini <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 06:49:25AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > On Mon, 11 May 2026 at 16:06, Tom Rini <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hey all, > > > > > > > > So it's release day and I have tagged and pushed things out. > > > > > > > > As I mentioned earlier today[1], I would like to again thank DENX (and > > > > the Denk family) for supporting the project for so long, and we're > > > > starting the process of moving our infrastructure to the OSU OSL lab and > > > > the u-boot-project.org domain. > > > > > > > > The delta between -rc1 and -rc2 looks OK to me, and I do still think > > > > there's a few outstanding PRs to come in and a few things I should pick > > > > up as well. But, the next branch is now open and so bigger changes > > > > should target that and I will be applying a few things there shortly. > > > > > > > > To repeat what I said in rc2 (and will keep repeatint) is that it might > > > > really be time to retire support for running our tools on Windows under > > > > MSYS, rather than something like WSL. The move to support more modern > > > > OpenSSL versions has hit a lack of support problem in MSYS[2]. > > > > > > I'm not really the right person to answer this, since I'm not a > > > Windows user. But as I understand it, this would mean not building > > > Windows executables anymore. Is that right? > > > > > > Should we perhaps just build without the pkcs11-provider feature? > > > > In the age of WSL, I'm not sure the value of supporting MSYS. If someone > > is using this, and steps up to resolve the problem, great. Otherwise we > > should end up dropping it. Unlike the macOS side, we haven't had a > > report of a user in well over a decade I think at this point. > > We were certainly using this when UPL was being worked on- 2023 I > think. The Tianocore people use Windows and needed mkimage. > > I took a bit of a look at what is involved here. Basically with WSL > you should be able to run 'wsl.exe mkimage ...' and things should > work. I haven't actually tried it though. > > It would not be too hard to add the package to MSYS, but that just > makes it build...it would not actually be useful without hooking into > Windows APIs about which I have no knowledge. > > So I agree it is best to retire it, perhaps document WSL as the means > to run mkimage - will we be able to have some CI tests for it?
WSL is just Linux userspace, I don't think there's a need to for us to add a test on top there. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
