[yocto] Making Hob better.

[Nick Krause]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:00 PM, John Unland
<opensourcejohn2112 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>I'm not sure a separate bootloaders layer would really make sense - we normally keep bootloaders either in OE-Core...
>>Are there bootloader(s) that you are looking for that are currently missing?
>
> Well I know I like to use U-Boot since it can go across multiple
> archs. Well I guess it makes since to just have it in OE-Core. Other
> than that that's what I wanted was U-Boot for x86 mostly....But if
> It's in OE-Core then there's no need to abstract that out to a
> different layer I guess.
>
> Thanks.
> John
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Paul Eggleton
> <paul.eggleton at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> Hi John,
>>
>> On Tuesday 11 November 2014 11:51:23 John Unland wrote:
>>> What about bootloaders? Where would I file a enhancement for different
>>> boot loaders (U-Boot, Lilo, etc.). Would be good if we had a boot
>>> loaders layer.
>>
>> I'm not sure a separate bootloaders layer would really make sense - we
>> normally keep bootloaders either in OE-Core (where we currently have u-boot,
>> grub, grub-efi, syslinux, gummiboot, etc.) or in specific BSPs where a specific
>> bootloader is needed (or a specific version of an existing bootloader, e.g.
>> BSPs shipping their own version of u-boot is common). FWIW there is also a
>> meta-initramfs layer in the meta-openembedded repository which contains
>> kexecboot.
>>
>> Are there bootloader(s) that you are looking for that are currently missing?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Paul
>>
>> --
>>
>> Paul Eggleton
>> Intel Open Source Technology Centre
> --
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto at yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
Do we support the kernel supporting off EFI directly as this can make
boot much faster as there is no need for another boot loader in order
to instruct the kernel
how to boot your respected device.
Cheers Nick