Firmware dir
Frederick Bambrough (1372) 826 posts |
In PlingBoot.Utils.SetChoices there’s a new line setting BootFirmware$Path. What’s that about? Just curious ’cos I noticed. |
Chris Mahoney (1684) 2122 posts |
Hmm. The Git commit says nothing more than “Declare a BootFirmware path for hardware drivers to use” and all it seems to do is set the new variable to <BootResources$Dir>.Firmware (assuming that I’m reading the file correctly: I’m on a Windows machine so don’t have the proper detokeniser). Is that Firmware directory new too? It’s not in my 2022-vintage !Boot, at least. |
David Pitt (9872) 306 posts |
From the Titanium with !Boot from the beta HardDisc4 of 2024-03-31. *show *firmware* BootFirmware$Path : ADFS::Titan4.$.!BOOT.Resources.Firmware. *
+=1 Goodies yet to come? NVMeDriver?? |
Andrew Rawnsley (492) 1423 posts |
Most likely intended for wifi firmware which gets softloaded when the driver loads. You don’t want to pad a driver full of unnecessary binary blobs for each variant, so it makes sense to store it on disc. For the ROD wifi beta, we use !OBSD.Firmware. I’d have expected !Internet.Firmware from ROOL, but making it a separate system variable makes it easy to re-locate as necessary. Of course, at this point we don’t know how driver-specific this firmware would be, but the idea of a shared resource that both stacks could utilise makes some degree of sense. |
Frederick Bambrough (1372) 826 posts |
One level up. I suppose one could argue that WiFi isn’t internet? |
Steve Pampling (1551) 7968 posts |
Wi-Fi is a subdivision of Network. In this particular instance, I suspect the “Firmware” could be for any bit of hardware supporting Networking, or storage, or display, or… |
Richard Walker (2090) 416 posts |
I was going to suggest that it could be for devices which need custom firmware loading, such as WiFi chips. But Andrew has comprehensively beaten me! If we’re into splitting hairs, then you could say that !Internet isn’t Internet… it’s the TCP/IP stack. Are there many applications for WiFi which do not use TCP/IP? (hmm… anything UDP, I guess!) |
David J. Ruck (33) 1503 posts |
TCP/IP includes UDP |
Steve Pampling (1551) 7968 posts |
You mean IP includes TCP and UDP, TCP/IP is the connection oriented side, UDP/IP is the connectionless. |
David J. Ruck (33) 1503 posts |
Ok, you force me to use more words; when people say “the TCP/IP stack”, they mean the “TCP/IP, UDP/IP (and some other IP stuff) stack”. But obviously that is a bit of a mouthful, so they use less words. |
Dave Higton (1515) 3409 posts |
How about “IP stack”? |
Rick Murray (539) 13440 posts |
Oh, you mean “the internet”. <ducks and runs away> |
Steve Pampling (1551) 7968 posts |
Much better. |
Steve Pampling (1551) 7968 posts |
Aw, please. What they usually say is something like “I’ve lost my Internet”1, which on a ‘nice’ day is allowed to pass, on the playful days, not. 1 One response (not mine) was: “Have you? Where were you when you last had it? Have you checked all your pockets?” – cue departure of the lost soul in a major huff. |
Steve Pampling (1551) 7968 posts |
Me too. |
James Pankhurst (8374) 101 posts |
At least it’s mildly better than when the media was touting the “information superhighway”, aka a 64k ISDN line. Also reminds me of a book I still have “The Internet by Email”, a gloriously informative book on how to perform internet related tasks, using only email. |
John WILLIAMS (8368) 485 posts |
“Please Sir, my pen’s run out.” “Then run out after it, boy!” Seriously though, in French “internet” is initially capitalised as a proper noun like God, and thus you could not claim ownership. No articles or possessive pronouns allowed! |
Rick Murray (539) 13440 posts |