On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:06:51PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > You effectively seem to be suggesting that nothing will ever get better > on the UEFI side, and the only benefit of the plugfest is that we get to > see the latest brokenness and try to come up with a workaround for it > before the consumers are afflicted with it? Pretty much. There's a decent chance that board vendors already have the broken code before we end up testing against it. > That's a really pessimistic view, and I'd really like us to be a little > more optimistic. Things can't be, or at least can't *stay*, that bad. > Surely? Most vendors don't care about testing against Linux, and we can't make them care. What they're more likely to test against is the SCT, and extending that to cover a wider range of test cases (such as exhausting variable space) is much more likely to result in things being caught before anything is shipped - but even then, board vendors are going to take IBV code, perform "value add", never run a test suite and just make sure it boots Windows. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
