From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rymes To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: Can/should we prospectively drop various kernel capabilities related to firmware access? Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2022 21:52:45 -0400 Message-ID: <1AE71C68-8777-4AE1-AC6F-8F8F2784B7E3@rymes.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2072763491924832297==" List-Id: --===============2072763491924832297== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On Jun 5, 2022, at 11:58 AM, Peter M=C3=BCller = wrote: [snip] > Following this principle, I would like to see things such as the multimedia > stack we currently support in IPFire 2.x go in IPFire 3.x. [snip] Peter, This should be an interesting discussion, but first I want to confirm that I = am reading the above sentence correctly. Specifically, =E2=80=9Cgo in=E2=80= =9D could be interpreted two different ways: 1.) be added to 2.) be removed from I assume it=E2=80=99s the latter, based on the context, but I figured it was = worth asking just to be certain. As for your main question, I understand the impulse for users to want to have= a single machine to host files, serve as a firewall, be a hypervisor, and so= on, but I tend to agree with your assessment that the firewall should be as = dedicated a machine as possible. As for the firmware issue, is it not possible to boot from another medium to = accomplish this goal? Tom --===============2072763491924832297==--