Re: [PATCH] fix name of default boot image on AArch64

[Andrey Borzenkov]

В Пн, 06/01/2014 в 18:51 +0100, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
пишет:
> On 06.01.2014 17:29, Andrey Borzenkov wrote:
> > В Пн, 06/01/2014 в 11:34 +0000, Leif Lindholm пишет:
> >> On Wed, Jan 01, 2014 at 12:54:36PM +0400, Andrey Borzenkov wrote:
> >>> According to UEFI 2.4 specification, default boot file name on AArch64
> >>> is BOOTAA64.EFI (3.4.1.1 Removable Media Boot Behavior).
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >>>  util/grub-install.c | 2 +-
> >>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/util/grub-install.c b/util/grub-install.c
> >>> index 8cfe0ea..d3b9db7 100644
> >>> --- a/util/grub-install.c
> >>> +++ b/util/grub-install.c
> >>> @@ -1091,7 +1091,7 @@ main (int argc, char *argv[])
> >>>         efi_file = "BOOTARM.EFI";
> >>>         break;
> >>>       case GRUB_INSTALL_PLATFORM_ARM64_EFI:
> >>> -       efi_file = "BOOTAARCH64.EFI";
> >>> +       efi_file = "BOOTAA64.EFI";
> >>>         break;
> >>>       default:
> >>>         grub_util_error ("%s", _("You've found a bug"));
> >>> -- 
> >>> tg: (668add2..) u/aarch64-default-boot (depends on: master)
> >>
> >> Oops - muscle memory override.
> >> My only excuse is that current Tianocore Bds for arm* is not conformant
> >> to the removable media boot behaviour, so this could not currently be
> >> tested. Fixing this is on my to-do list for Q1.
> >> Could this be applied please?
> >>
> > 
> > Should not grubarm64 be changed into grubaa64 as well, even to just fit
> > into 8+3 name? Having them consistent makes life easier. And now is just
> > the right point in time before name is set in stone.
> > 
> Agreed. Could you do it?

Done.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part