On 1/15/20 4:39 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 1/15/20 1:29 PM, pmkellly@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 1/15/20 3:22 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 1/15/20 11:58 AM, pmkellly@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
I get the fwupd on these machines, but from what I've read the TMP
is a separate chip on these machines and is not programmable. I
checked the Lenovo web site under support and for these models. The
page starts out with an "Out of Support" banner. Though there is a
BIOS update available (only implemented through Windows), there is
no TPM update available. They do seem to make TPM updates for the
newer machines. Oh well back to budgeting for newer machines. I
can't really complain. I bought these for a little over $100 each as
manufacturer rehabbed about 7 years ago. Now I'll just buy some
rehabbed i3s or i5s. These can be repurposed for something where TPM
doesn't matter. They still run fine after all.
Did I miss why you can't just disable TPM? I doubt that you're using
it.
The TPM was enabled in the BIOS/UEFI by default. I tried it both
enabled and disabled, but still got the TMP2 failures every 3 seconds.
That's why I removed the tpm2-abrmd package. That solved the problem.
I also sort of doubt that any of these PCs actually use it. However, I
have no view of what all uses TPM on Fedora workstation. My guess
would be things like Keyring, The password retention and Master
password in Firefox, BIOS passwords and encrypted drives, but I don't
really know.
Most likely none of those. Try running it without that package and if
it works, you're good. Really, nothing can depend on that because there
is no guarantee that the computer will have a TPM available.
Well They have been running fine with the tpm2-abrmd removed for about 3
days now with no complaints. In that case I'll keep these around until
there's a more compelling reason to replace them.
So I wonder why it's installed by default then. If it's apparently only
used by special security related applications that are not part of the
default Fedora install. I would see it as a dependency for such special
applications that gets installed when the special application is
installed. Well, I guess it's okay if they can get it so it stops and
remains quiet when it discovers it can't run. If it was me I would set a
flag someplace so it wouldn't even try to start again once that
condition had been found. That would stop unproductive journal entries
on restarts. I think a single journal entry for the first discovery
would serve just fine.
Have a Great Day!
Pat (tablepc)
_______________________________________________
test mailing list -- test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to test-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
