Hi all,

Currently we have 7 packages defining the efi flag and an additional 2
defining the uefi flag. These flags do the same thing, add support for
(U)EFI booting. I therefore propose we introduce efi as a new global
flag and later rename the uefi flag to efi in sys-apps/fwupd and sys-apps/ipmicfg.

I don't have a strong preference between the efi or uefi flags, but
since a majority of the packages has chosen efi I suggest we go with that.

Best regards,
Andrew


From 737eb5d8509b088f7689d417375c00773c131042 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Andrew Ammerlaan <andrewammerlaan@gentoo.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2023 10:47:55 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 14/14] profiles/use.desc: add efi global use flag

Signed-off-by: Andrew Ammerlaan <andrewammerlaan@gentoo.org>
---
profiles/use.desc | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/profiles/use.desc b/profiles/use.desc
index df2115388949..ed600244f273 100644
--- a/profiles/use.desc
+++ b/profiles/use.desc
@@ -70,6 +70,7 @@ dvb - Add support for DVB (Digital Video Broadcasting)
dvd - Add support for DVDs
dvdr - Add support for DVD writer hardware (e.g. in xcdroast)
eds - Enable support for Evolution-Data-Server (EDS)
+efi - Enable support the (Unified) Extensible Firmware Interface
elogind - Enable session tracking via sys-auth/elogind
emacs - Add support for GNU Emacs
emboss - Add support for the European Molecular Biology Open Software
Suite
--
2.41.0

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 1970-01-01 at 00:00 +0000, Andrew Ammerlaan wrote:

Hi all,

Currently we have 7 packages defining the efi flag and an additional 2 defining the uefi flag. These flags do the same thing, add support for
(U)EFI booting. I therefore propose we introduce efi as a new global
flag and later rename the uefi flag to efi in sys-apps/fwupd and sys-apps/ipmicfg.

I don't have a strong preference between the efi or uefi flags, but
since a majority of the packages has chosen efi I suggest we go with
that.

Best regards,
Andrew

 From 737eb5d8509b088f7689d417375c00773c131042 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
2001
From: Andrew Ammerlaan <andrewammerlaan@gentoo.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2023 10:47:55 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 14/14] profiles/use.desc: add efi global use flag

Signed-off-by: Andrew Ammerlaan <andrewammerlaan@gentoo.org>
---
  profiles/use.desc | 1 +
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/profiles/use.desc b/profiles/use.desc
index df2115388949..ed600244f273 100644
--- a/profiles/use.desc
+++ b/profiles/use.desc
@@ -70,6 +70,7 @@ dvb - Add support for DVB (Digital Video
Broadcasting)
  dvd - Add support for DVDs
  dvdr - Add support for DVD writer hardware (e.g. in xcdroast)
  eds - Enable support for Evolution-Data-Server (EDS)
+efi - Enable support the (Unified) Extensible Firmware Interface
  elogind - Enable session tracking via sys-auth/elogind
  emacs - Add support for GNU Emacs
  emboss - Add support for the European Molecular Biology Open
Software
Suite

Please switch to "uefi". UEFI is the forward going name and more aligned
with how it's used commonly. It's called the "UEFI forum" that writes
the UEFI spec and it's on uefi.org. A GPU needs a UEFI GOP to
initialise.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Andrew Ammerlaan <andrewammerlaan@gentoo.org> writes:

Hi all,

Currently we have 7 packages defining the efi flag and an additional 2 defining the uefi flag. These flags do the same thing, add support for
(U)EFI booting. I therefore propose we introduce efi as a new global
flag and later rename the uefi flag to efi in sys-apps/fwupd and sys-apps/ipmicfg.

I don't have a strong preference between the efi or uefi flags, but
since a majority of the packages has chosen efi I suggest we go with
that.

Let's do USE=uefi please - UEFI is the modern name for it, and EFI is
legacy. I'd like to avoid another USE=ssl situation (where we're
stuck with it forever given we have no mechanism for USE flag renames,
despite the fact that it's really TLS now).

thanks,
sam

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iOUEARYKAI0WIQQlpruI3Zt2TGtVQcJzhAn1IN+RkAUCZLEQsF8UgAAAAAAuAChp c3N1ZXItZnByQG5vdGF0aW9ucy5vcGVucGdwLmZpZnRoaG9yc2VtYW4ubmV0MjVB NkJCODhERDlCNzY0QzZCNTU0MUMyNzM4NDA5RjUyMERGOTE5MA8cc2FtQGdlbnRv by5vcmcACgkQc4QJ9SDfkZAQGgEA5dkA6NoSVrDpamvQz5gwv3hrQf9B8EA4QMGQ G7uhSqoBAMtDux+SimX+fbDtFIKTdyXjw8LiJWOu0QHQ73MDzfUE
=o5F2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 14/07/2023 11:05, David Seifert wrote:

On Thu, 1970-01-01 at 00:00 +0000, Andrew Ammerlaan wrote:

Hi all,

Currently we have 7 packages defining the efi flag and an additional 2
defining the uefi flag. These flags do the same thing, add support for
(U)EFI booting. I therefore propose we introduce efi as a new global
flag and later rename the uefi flag to efi in sys-apps/fwupd and
sys-apps/ipmicfg.

I don't have a strong preference between the efi or uefi flags, but
since a majority of the packages has chosen efi I suggest we go with
that.

Best regards,
Andrew

Please switch to "uefi". UEFI is the forward going name and more aligned
with how it's used commonly. It's called the "UEFI forum" that writes
the UEFI spec and it's on uefi.org. A GPU needs a UEFI GOP to
initialise.

Alright, that's fine by me. The list of packages that needs renaming of
the use flag then becomes:
- app-emulation/xen
- sys-block/perccli
- sys-block/sas2ircu
- sys-block/sas3flash
- sys-block/sas3ircu
- sys-boot/syslinux
- sys-firmware/ipxe

From 681c82d6bc415b9d9f25077e0c32f629cd9a42ec Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Andrew Ammerlaan <andrewammerlaan@gentoo.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2023 10:47:55 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] profiles/use.desc: add uefi global use flag

Signed-off-by: Andrew Ammerlaan <andrewammerlaan@gentoo.org>
---
profiles/use.desc | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/profiles/use.desc b/profiles/use.desc
index df2115388949..6034f3bf6fc3 100644
--- a/profiles/use.desc
+++ b/profiles/use.desc
@@ -328,6 +328,7 @@ tk - Add support for Tk GUI toolkit
truetype - Add support for FreeType and/or FreeType2 fonts
udev - Enable virtual/udev integration (device discovery, power and
storage device support, etc)
udisks - Enable storage management support (automounting, volume
monitoring, etc)
+uefi - Enable support for the Unified Extensible Firmware Interface
unicode - Add support for Unicode
unwind - Add support for call stack unwinding and function name resolution
upnp - Enable UPnP port mapping support
--
2.41.0

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 5:07 AM Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> wrote:

Andrew Ammerlaan <andrewammerlaan@gentoo.org> writes:

Hi all,

Currently we have 7 packages defining the efi flag and an additional 2 defining the uefi flag. These flags do the same thing, add support for (U)EFI booting. I therefore propose we introduce efi as a new global
flag and later rename the uefi flag to efi in sys-apps/fwupd and sys-apps/ipmicfg.

I don't have a strong preference between the efi or uefi flags, but
since a majority of the packages has chosen efi I suggest we go with
that.

Let's do USE=uefi please - UEFI is the modern name for it, and EFI is
legacy. I'd like to avoid another USE=ssl situation (where we're
stuck with it forever given we have no mechanism for USE flag renames, despite the fact that it's really TLS now).

Any thoughts on grub_platforms_efi-32 and grub_platforms_efi-64?

If we want to rename USE flags, I would probably take the opportunity
to eliminate the GRUB_PLATFORMS USE_EXPAND altogether.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 14/07/2023 19:11, Mike Gilbert wrote:

On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 5:07 AM Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> wrote:

Andrew Ammerlaan <andrewammerlaan@gentoo.org> writes:

Hi all,

Currently we have 7 packages defining the efi flag and an additional 2
defining the uefi flag. These flags do the same thing, add support for
(U)EFI booting. I therefore propose we introduce efi as a new global
flag and later rename the uefi flag to efi in sys-apps/fwupd and
sys-apps/ipmicfg.

I don't have a strong preference between the efi or uefi flags, but
since a majority of the packages has chosen efi I suggest we go with
that.

Let's do USE=uefi please - UEFI is the modern name for it, and EFI is
legacy. I'd like to avoid another USE=ssl situation (where we're
stuck with it forever given we have no mechanism for USE flag renames,
despite the fact that it's really TLS now).

Any thoughts on grub_platforms_efi-32 and grub_platforms_efi-64?

If we want to rename USE flags, I would probably take the opportunity
to eliminate the GRUB_PLATFORMS USE_EXPAND altogether.

For grub specifically there is another thing to consider. Currently
emerging grub does not actually build an efi executable, this (I think)
is done when you 'grub-install'. This is unfortunate because that makes
it the only bootloader that you can't conveniently sign with
secureboot.eclass.

I briefly looked into the problem and there is 'grub-mkstandalone' which
could be used to generate (and then sign) a grub efi executable. But how
this would then work with 'grub-install' I do not know. I don't use grub myself, but maybe someone who does can look into this.

Best regards,
Andrew

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)