Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Revert change of building everything-heads to musl-cross-make (musl-cross-make all but coreboot) #929

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

tlaurion
Copy link
Collaborator

  • Builds all modules but coreboot against musl-cross-make
  • Builds coreboot against coreboot's musl-cross toolchain.

Partly fixes #927, where midterm-longterm is to move away of musl-cross-make and build with guix-buildstack, where #927 should be invested.

@tlaurion
Copy link
Collaborator Author

tlaurion commented Dec 12, 2020

(Intention here was to test building #709, untested, while build successful)
@MrChromebox @PatrickRudolph

You see any problem in merging this?

PatrickRudolph and others added 3 commits December 13, 2020 13:12
* Add vboot support to supported Lenovo boards
* Didn't add config that wouldn't build (non ME stripped versions)

Signed-off-by: Patrick Rudolph <[email protected]>
…t toolchain for its compilation

- remove coreboot patches to build coreboot against musl-cross-make directly
- musl-cross-make only responsible to build the rest of the modules
@tlaurion
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Tested xx30-hotp-maximized rom : functional

@MrChromebox
Copy link
Contributor

I'll try to test this tomorrow along with the busybox bump

@MrChromebox
Copy link
Contributor

any reason the lenovo vboot stuff is being pulled in here? Don't see how that that shouldn't be a separate PR

@MrChromebox
Copy link
Contributor

built/booted a Librem Mini v2 (w/coreboot-4.13 and busybox 1.3.1) using coreboot toolchain to build coreboot, no issues

@tlaurion
Copy link
Collaborator Author

tlaurion commented Dec 17, 2020

@MrChromebox

any reason the lenovo vboot stuff is being pulled in here? Don't see how that that shouldn't be a separate PR

It is in another PR. Was just not building outside of having CircleCI and the present changed.

No sure how to merge this since that PR #562 is totally stalled.

@tlaurion
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@MrChromebox do you see other optimizations? I remember vauely that this is a derivative of your proposition for 4.12 where force commits made the history vanished. I want this to be a transition to #927

@MrChromebox
Copy link
Contributor

@tlaurion IMO, this PR should be just the changes to the coreboot module itself, removing the corss-compiler patches, and adjusting CI dependencies. Adding vboot support (configs and CI) should be separate. The CI changes to the KGPE-D16 should be separate as well.

I'm not sure how 562 is relevant here, since it was created before coreboot's measured boot (which we now use) was separated from vboot.

This PR certainly is a start towards 927, but it has too many unrelated things tacked on. I would absolutely force-push an update to the branch which includes either a single commit, or one for the module/patch changes, plus one for the CI changes.

@tlaurion
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Replaced by #938

@tlaurion tlaurion closed this Dec 26, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Discussion] Heads buildstack directions, past and future
3 participants