Slashdot Log In
Google Sponsors the LinuxBIOS project
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Wed Nov 15, 2006 09:50 AM
from the guts-like-to-be-free-too dept.
from the guts-like-to-be-free-too dept.
Rockgod noted that "The LinuxBIOS project aims to take down the last barrier in Open Source systems by providing a free firmware (BIOS) implementation. LinuxBIOS celebrates its Sixth anniversary this year, and has an installed base of over 1 million LinuxBIOS systems. With the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) project, that number is expected to exceed 10 million users in 2007. LinuxBIOS supports 65 mainboards from 31 vendors in v1 and another 56 mainboards from 27 vendors in v2"
Related Stories
[+]
OLPC Available to the Public Early 2008 192 comments
Zoxed writes "The BBC is reporting that the OLPC will be available to the public early next year on a buy-2-get-1 basis through eBay. With its cheap price, fully open spec. and full/open hardware support for Linux, expandability, 2W rating and LinuxBIOS booting it sounds like an embedded-Linux hackers favorite new toy."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
It's not the last barrier (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
http://www.sun.com/processors/opensparc/ [sun.com]
Enlightened yet?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
But anyway...
The processor of a system is. Being "open" to change doesn't really get you anything. If you have enough money to do a production run of a modern CPU, then the costs of buying into SPARC International, or the reference design of MIPS, or an IBM POWER, etc, etc, is nothing. Getting a custom chip
Re:It's not the last barrier (Score:5, Insightful)
Who would have the skill (to say nothing of the fab) to make a change to the hardware, and then distribute it?
Parent
OSS has benefits to non-coders. (Score:5, Insightful)
Writing code and recompiling a piece of software is almost as much a black art to most people, as designing a microprocessor and fabricating a chip is.
Source code is meaningless gibberish to most users, regardless of whether that source code describes hardware or software. Code written in VHDL is just a slightly more arcane strain of gibberish than C, but still meaningless.
Most people (who have even the foggiest idea of open source) benefit from it indirectly: by having higher-quality products to begin with, and having them available from more vendors, and having a guarantee that if a vendor tanks, that their product stands a better chance of being supported by somebody else (because another company or organization can take it over). This would also be true with hardware. An open and well-documented chip design would be available, were it popular, from a variety of vendors, and even if one vendor went out of business, the design would survive. These benefits exist even to people who cannot understand code, and exist for both hardware and software.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It wouldn't be the last barrier to "open" systems, which would require some analogus open regime for hardware, but it wouldn't be "open source".
opencores.org (Score:3, Informative)
why would a major manufacturer of motheboards (Score:5, Interesting)
What do Award and Phoenix have better than Linux?
Re:why would a major manufacturer of motheboards (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:why would a major manufacturer of motheboards (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Eternal game of catch-up? (Score:4, Insightful)
I always assumed that they were made by Award and Phoenix in conjunction with the mobo/chipset manufacturers, because the BIOS was specific to a particular configuration of parts, and wouldn't be interchangeable.
So if you did write an "open source BIOS," how would you keep it up to date with the multitude of different chipsets and motherboards? Wouldn't each one require its own modified version? Seems like, unless the major motherboard manufacturers commit to using LinuxBIOS, that they'll forever be playing catch-up, trying to modify and QA their revisions against new pieces of hardware. Which I guess isn't a bad thing, but it seems like it'll never be mainstream that way.
Parent
Re:Eternal game of catch-up? (Score:5, Insightful)
I suppose it's possible that such a motherboard vendor might want to donate engineering time and samples to the project as well. They would have to weigh the cost of that effort against a host of other costs; licensing costs to use Award or Phoenix, the size of the expected market for the combined product, etc. Show them that the FOSS BIOS will work for MS Vista and they'll have a real incentive to push for it. Tell them that the market will be limited to just Linux and *BSD and they'll probably lose interest really fast.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Heck, I have TWO EZ-Cam webcams I bought back in 2001 or 2002. The designers sometimes allow their contract manufacturers to change up components for almost-the-same depending upon
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This isn't just a random open source BIOS though. It's based on the linux kernel, and all the hardware support that entails. Or well, as much as you can cram into your kernel image. This kernel then bootstraps to another kernel (or through ADLO, apparently can run WinXP or Win2k's NTLDR.) The only bootloaders it in fact supports are NTLDR and LILO, apparently.
Re:Eternal game of catch-up? (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, even a person that did know code, would need to be very comfortable (I would think) to write or change something that could potentially brick their mobo.
So whether the code is modifiable or not, really isn't relevant to all but a few users, at least in the direct sense. There are indirect benefits of having code available (see my other post in this thread concerning the indirect benefits of OSS to non-coders), but most people are going to look at the piece of software as a unit, and ask whether it works, and if it doesn't, they're going to move on to something else. The benefits of OSS are rarely so great as to make hiring a skilled programmer to modify it for you worthwhile.
It sounds from TFA that they have a nice automated QA system set up, where new revisions get tested against actual hardware automatically, but they're going to have to sustain an awfully high level of effort, in order to keep creating and testing new software revisions to cope with all the new boards that get released to the market every month.
I'm not panning the project; I really hope they succeed. It just seems like yet another project that probably won't have direct support from the hardware manufacturers, and as a result will always be one step behind mainstream usability. Perhaps that's okay -- maybe "mainstream usability" is overrated. But it's something worth considering.
Parent
One word. (Score:2)
They can control most, if not all, of what hardware is used by the motherboard. DRM? Sure, we can force that.
Re:why would a major manufacturer of motheboards (Score:4, Insightful)
What do Award and Phoenix have better than Linux?
two simple reasons.
1 - they do what they are told by the OS and content industries. "Trusted computing" is a buzzword they spent lots of money on.
2 - A linux Bios will not have the ability to lock the user on DRM or Os choices. something they desperately want at Microsoft. D oyuo think a company will make a motherboard that microsoft will refuse to support their os on? how about one that will never run windows VistaXP2 with "Protect you from you" technology? because the Bios does not refuse to boot an OS without a Microsoft certificate?
Try and buy yourself an ATX Alpha processor motherboard or Power PC motherboard. They exist but are insane priced because nobody buys them but uber geeks and research/science people....
Do you want your next Linux computer to cost you 3 times as much because your Motherboard costs $1800.00?
Parent
when I read "guts-like-to-be-free-too" (Score:2, Funny)
An I the only one?
Re: (Score:2)
Extensible Firmware Interface (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Extensible Firmware Interface (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Since you included a "?", I believe the answer you are looking for is "Turd" , although Linus may have put it best when he called it "the other piece of Intel brain damage".
BBH
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
"You acknowledge and agree that You will not, directly or indirectly: (i) reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble or otherwise attempt to discover the underlying source code or underlying ideas or algorithms of the Software; (ii) modify, translate, or create derivative works based on the Software; (iii) rent, lease, distribute, sell, resell or assign, or otherwise transfer rights to the Software; or (iv) remove any proprietary
Any place to buy the MOBO with lb pre-installed? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Any place to buy the MOBO with lb pre-installed (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
LinuxBIOS has a problem (Score:2, Informative)
From the site:
LinuxBIOS has a problem
Sorry! This site is experiencing technical difficulties.
Try waiting a few minutes and reloading.
Knew that'd get your attention ;) I really wanted a list of motherboards that support this... I think it would be really neat to have a customizeable BIOS.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:VJTK5OuL8OIJ:
Hitting two sacred cows at once... (Score:3, Interesting)
1) Given that yesterday's news was that OLPC managed to produce a whole 10 computers, and that we're now halfway through November 2006 -- yeah, I can't see how they could possibly fail to hit 10 million in 2007!
2) Has Googlefawning now hit the point where it's no longer necessary for Google or the Slashdot story to explain exactly what it is that "Google sponsors" means? (Apparently they paid for a build system. Take that, Gates Foundation!)
Re:Hitting two sacred cows at once... (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Why bother? (Score:2)
I like linux because (in theory) I can look at the source code and see whats
running and modify it and hence modify my enviroment. Why would I care about the
BIOS? For all intents and purpose it just the first stage bootstrap system for
the hardware. As long as it does this quickly and simply who cares who or how
its written? Ok , if ever BIOSes had some sort of DRM style restrictions installed
them yes , maybe it'll have a use. But
A few primary reasons: (Score:2)
2) No unnecessary hardware initialization or checks
3) Stupid bootstrapping tricks (if your onboard bios can't boot from it, linuxbios probably can)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
AFAIA the BIOS hasn't provided I/O services since 16 bit DOS days. I can't
see why linux or any other 32 bit OS would switch into 16 bit mode to access
some crusty HD or floppy driver when they've got their own anyway.
BIOS + DRM = lockin .. (Score:4, Informative)
http://slashdot.org/hardware/03/09/04/1427237.sht
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Methods, apparatus
A method of initializing a computer system equipped with a debugging [freepatentsonline.com] system"
"a set of BIOS resume tasks [freepatentsonline.com] specific to that operating system type are dispatched for execution in response to a slee
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why bother? (Score:5, Insightful)
For the same reason you care about other programs being open. E.g.
- Fixing bug. Eg hibernate problems.
- Checking for bugs and backdoord.
- Improving it to your needs. E.g., I would like to be able to boot from USB-disks or a CFlash card in a PCI-adaptor.
Or I could remove unnecessary stuff and put in a shell. Or an SSH server i the BIOS.
- Performance. My BIOS is slow. It does a lot of unnecessary things.
- Consistency. Next time I get a new computer, it would be nice to have the same bios. A company might prefer to use the same BIOS on all computers.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Have you ever used Solaris? On Sun Hardware? It's great to able to send the OS a 'break', and get an OK> prompt, where you can configure low-level stuff. It's one of the things that makes me love Sun+Solaris way more than I love linux.
Even better would be if we could have a standard co-processor-thingie listening on the serial port, like on SUN, where "lights-out-management" could be done. I really like that feature of Sun hardware too
HP's ILO and Del
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If you actually read the LinuxBIOS web site, you will see that a prime motivation was to allow remote updating of the BIOS on Linux clusters. It beats attaching a keyboard to each of 256 motherboards and updating them one by one.
Manufacturers of embedded systems are likely to be interested in a BIOS that is free and fast.
It is not so clear what the benefits are for Joe and Mary desktop user. I'm sure most Linux users will continue to use the BIOS that comes with their board.
Re:Why bother? (Score:4, Interesting)
So it takes the BIOS quite a lot of time to do something which isn't used anyways.
Parent
Link and Confusion (Score:2)
First, the Website seems to be slashdotted, but anyone interested can get the basics about LinuxBIOS from the wikipedia page [wikipedia.org].
After reading said page it looks like this is an attempt to make a fast, barebones BIOS replacement without all the cruft of traditional BIOSes. Like others, however, I'm not sure I see the use for this on servers and workstations when compared to EFI or Open Firmware, both of which are already deployed. My current laptop boots via EFI. What disadvantage is there to me that this proj
LinuxBIOS targets pre-EFI machines. (Score:2)
Info on Linux BIOS in actual usage? (Score:5, Interesting)
I have seen this mentioned every so often here, and I am interested in trying it out. But, the stuff I read blurs the line between what I think of as BIOS functions and the actual OS. So, I am not sure if it's worth trying out or not.
Does anyone have pointers to good information, or experience themselves? The kind of questions I have are:
- Do I still have the configuration capabilities that you expect in a Phoenix/Award BIOS? En/Dis-able integrated devices, Fan Control, ACPI en/dis-able, etc.
- The articles all say that LinuxBIOS boots a linux kernel very quickly. Is this into a limited BIOS setup environment, or is this the actual kernel for the Operating System that you're running? If it's the latter, don't kernel upgrades become more difficult/dangerous? (Are there any docs which go through the system bootstrap process step by step?)
- Is AMD64 (in 64 bit mode) supported?
- Beyond the Linux hobbyist incentive to try out new things, are there any other major advantages to using LinuxBIOS on my home Linux server (which is a supported board)? Do I lose anything my current Award BIOS offers?
Re:Info on Linux BIOS in actual usage? (Score:4, Informative)
LinuxBIOS supports several different types of payloads: Linux, Open Firmware, Etherboot, etc. If you are using a Linux kernel payload, then you probably don't want to be upgrading it often. In that case, you can set up the first kernel to kexec a second kernel (before kexec, there was a patch called the two kernel monte).
AMD64's 64-bit mode is definitely supported.
It's not trivial (yet) to boot a version of MS Windows with LinuxBIOS, but using Linux as a BIOS can give all sorts of benefits. One very interesting capability for people running beowulf clusters is that you can boot over any network device that Linux supports (e.g. Myrinet or Infiniband). That may not mean anything to a regular home user, but the point is that you have a whole lot more flexibility in what you can do. Even if you don't want to make it boot your home system over your wireless LAN, it does increase your freedom and it prevents people from nibbling away at the freedom you already have.
I would say freedom from future DRM really is the biggest incentive for trying out LinuxBIOS at home. You can avoid Intel's EFI standard (they're pushing for it to be on all desktops and servers), which will enable companies to inflict DRM on you. Linus has made some very good points about why EFI is not good [kerneltrap.org]. One way to look at EFI is that it is basically an OS, and not a very good one.
There are several white papers and tutorials that do a good job of explaining how LinuxBIOS works. Look at the LinuxBIOS documentation [linuxbios.org] section.
Parent
Harddisk encryption (Score:3, Interesting)
It's basically as close as you can get to "tamper-proof" by a software-only approach and for notebooks, it would provide some reasonable theft protection, esp. if combined with a "this notebook is the property of
OLPC isn't using LinuxBIOS anymore (Score:5, Informative)