pbrobinson opened a new pull-request against the project: `fedora-atomic` that you are following: `` Add packages needed to support aarch64 single board computers ``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/fedora-atomic/pull-request/105
ausil merged a pull-request against the project: `fedora-atomic` that you are following.
Merged pull-request:
`` Add packages needed to support aarch64 single board computers ``
walters commented on the pull-request: `Add packages needed to support aarch64 single board computers` that you are following: `` One question; will these devices actually be using libostree's uboot backend? There are definitely non-Fedora users of that but this would be the first Fedora use of it, correct? Was it tested? ``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/fedora-atomic/pull-request/105
pbrobinson commented on the pull-request: `Add packages needed to support aarch64 single board computers` that you are following: ``
One question; will these devices actually be using libostree's uboot backend? There are definitely non-Fedora users of that but this would be the first Fedora use of it, correct? Was it tested?
No, on aarch64 we use grub2-efi, but the u-boot implements uEFI so it boots u-boot -> grub2 -> linux.
We need u-boot and the firmware so people can setup the devices to actually boot. ``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/fedora-atomic/pull-request/105
walters commented on the pull-request: `Add packages needed to support aarch64 single board computers` that you are following: ``
No, on aarch64 we use grub2-efi, but the u-boot implements uEFI so it boots u-boot -> grub2 -> linux.
Hah, OK. Just briefly though then - in this scenario does classical `grubby` update the grub2 config? And u-boot is actually an EFI binary or something? If there's a link to more information about this setup (or perhaps an interactive shell? I briefly glanced at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Machine_Resources_For_Package_Maintainer... but it looks like there's no aarch64 )
I suppose at some point I need to get one of these boxes to actually play with it locally. ``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/fedora-atomic/pull-request/105
pbrobinson commented on the pull-request: `Add packages needed to support aarch64 single board computers` that you are following: ``
Hah, OK. Just briefly though then - in this scenario does classical grubby update the grub2 config? And u-boot is actually an EFI binary or something? If there's a link to more information about this setup (or perhaps an interactive shell? I briefly glanced at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Machine_Resources_For_Package_Maintainer... but it looks like there's no aarch64 )
It's the exact same process used for all other grub efi upgrades.
U-boot it not an EFI binary, it's a firmware/bios (similar to say EDK2/tianocore EFI reference implementation used in the virt stacks), it had the ability to execute EFI binaries such as shim/grub2 etc, it can run shell and I believe now even passes a bunch of the EFI testsuite.
I suppose at some point I need to get one of these boxes to actually play with it locally.
It works on a RPi3 or Pine64 and will for a bunch more SBCs in F-28, feel free to msg me directly about anything else, prob a bit off topic for this ticket ``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/fedora-atomic/pull-request/105
atomic@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org
-
Colin Walters -
Dennis Gilmore
-
Peter Robinson