Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Coreboot Now Works On The Older MacBook 1,1 Too

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,126

    Default Coreboot Now Works On The Older MacBook 1,1 Too

    Phoronix: Coreboot Now Works On The Older MacBook 1,1 Too

    As an update to yesterday's story about Coreboot now working for the MacBook 2,1 model, with today's Git activity the open-source BIOS/UEFI replacement will also work with the even older 1,1 model...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTc2NjE

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    87

    Default

    Thanks God.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    269

    Default

    Coreboot project is more important than people think. Secure Boot proved that UEFI was a dead end for x86-based open-source systems and of course on ARM-based platforms things are even worse. As long as firmware is proprietary you never fully control the hardware you buy. Many custom hacks exist (especially for ARM) but they're just hacks - usually buggy or incomplete and almost always unmaintained in the long run in contrast with Coreboot which is as generic as BIOS replacement can get.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    49

    Default

    So that means that it's finally possible to have ahci support on macbooks?
    Because the mac uefi registered the ahci as a piix4 device and not an ahci.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    570

    Default Time may come when only coreboot or enthusiest boards can run Linux.

    Quote Originally Posted by prodigy_ View Post
    Coreboot project is more important than people think. Secure Boot proved that UEFI was a dead end for x86-based open-source systems and of course on ARM-based platforms things are even worse. As long as firmware is proprietary you never fully control the hardware you buy. Many custom hacks exist (especially for ARM) but they're just hacks - usually buggy or incomplete and almost always unmaintained in the long run in contrast with Coreboot which is as generic as BIOS replacement can get.
    I'm guessing the time is coming when factory firmware is locked to the current version of Windows and only aftermarket boards with fancy overclocking UEFI will retain the ability to run an alternative operating system, and that because they are sold without the rest of the machine or the OS. To run Linux on a machine sold with Windows or anything else will probably require either installing Coreboot, replacing the board, or finding an overclocking UEFI image for a board with the exact same chipset, whichever is easier for any particular machine.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    398

    Default

    Honestly, the instant that CoreBoot announces full support for my Acer Aspire 6930 (a Core2Duo CPU with GMA45 graphics), I'm going to flash it. My current BIOS is so crap, it's not even funny.

    I really hope CoreBoot gets more support in the future from many different devs/companies.
    Quick Question though: Does CoreBoot implement BIOS, UEFI, both, or it's own thing?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    207

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daktyl198 View Post
    Honestly, the instant that CoreBoot announces full support for my Acer Aspire 6930 (a Core2Duo CPU with GMA45 graphics), I'm going to flash it. My current BIOS is so crap, it's not even funny.

    I really hope CoreBoot gets more support in the future from many different devs/companies.
    Quick Question though: Does CoreBoot implement BIOS, UEFI, both, or it's own thing?
    No, Coreboot does not implement BIOS, UEFI, or it's own alternative.

    All coreboot aims to do it to get the hardware initialized and had off to something else. That something else might by a BIOS (seaBIOS) or UEFI (tianocore) implementation, or other thing (Grub or a linux kernel)

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WorBlux View Post
    No, Coreboot does not implement BIOS, UEFI, or it's own alternative.

    All coreboot aims to do it to get the hardware initialized and had off to something else. That something else might by a BIOS (seaBIOS) or UEFI (tianocore) implementation, or other thing (Grub or a linux kernel)
    So... what exactly is the point of a BIOS or UEFI, aside from a graphical way to configure your hardware? Or is that literally the only point...? I thought the BIOS/UEFI was the standards-based implementations of hardware initialization :/
    (A direct handoff to GRUB would make my computer boot about 8 seconds faster)

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daktyl198 View Post
    So... what exactly is the point of a BIOS or UEFI, aside from a graphical way to configure your hardware? Or is that literally the only point...? I thought the BIOS/UEFI was the standards-based implementations of hardware initialization :/
    (A direct handoff to GRUB would make my computer boot about 8 seconds faster)
    It's pretty much only overclocking and boot device selection nowadays. Neither coreboot nor linux have OC code, and no payload can boot from cd/floppy yet. I believe the payloads do support USB and PXE chainloading.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    207

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    It's pretty much only overclocking and boot device selection nowadays. Neither coreboot nor linux have OC code, and no payload can boot from cd/floppy yet. I believe the payloads do support USB and PXE chainloading.
    I disagree Linux can overclock by probing and changing MSR's. It's not necessarily easy but it's a UI rather than driver limitation.

    SeaBIOS can boot from optical ATAPI optical drives

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •