zlacker

>>todsac+(OP)
I totally understand the Frustration the author has here. But I'd rather have any working software version than 10 that don't work well at all and that has always been my pine64 experience. Great hardware, barely any documentation, important hardware and software features don't work at all or are locked behind a very old kernel version

>>dtx1+y9
How does making alternatives harder to boot and pissing of maintainers of software components they rely on improve their quality long-term?

>>detaro+0a
It's an entity that's in a position to make a design decision - "We will have one bootloader flashed onto the eMMC - the same for every device we produce." It creates a standard which users and developers alike can fix themselves to. It is definitely a good thing, if you are worried about productizing -- but perhaps not so great if you want a diverse community of hackers.

>>jovial+Ma
> The solution to this is Tow-Boot: a distribution of U-Boot that can be put in that flash chip. With this the U-Boot firmware can just be treated like system firmware and be updated through fwupd independent of what distributions ship. This would work not only for the PinePhone Pro, but would also enable things like installing your preferred Linux distribution on a PineBook Pro by popping in a flash drive with a UEFI installer, much like you can on any other laptop.

SPI + Tow-Boot would have standardized the boot process and made it more robust.

>>e2le+Vd
Late reply, but... The fact that there is a superior solution is kind of irrelevant. Everyone has their opinion on what is the best solution - I'm sure some people would disagree with your assessment of SPI+Tow-Boot. If there is no one who is actually in a position to make that call, you will just have chaos. That's my only point.