Jump to content

Were Back !


  • Please log in to reply
103 replies to this topic

#41
kevinosx

kevinosx

    InsanelyMac Geek

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 162 posts
oh wow! good to know! thanks Kiko

#42
Genex

Genex

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 74 posts
Does this mean that we will never have a BootCamp option? And that we allways have to patch a kernel , APLESMIBIOS, & or others kext to have working system?

Wow that sucks man....

#43
Kiko

Kiko

    You Dont Understand Me

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,889 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:United States Of Israel
Well, if you dont like it. Buy a mac. Not until motherboard vendors such as Intel and asus start to allow UEFI booting, then we will/should be able to get bootcamp, etc etc

#44
NeSuKuN

NeSuKuN

    -Zealot

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 531 posts
I thought that there were intel boards efi based already :S

#45
frizbot

frizbot

    InsanelyMac Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 403 posts
Yes, but Intel hasn't allowed, or it hasn't been discovered how to boot EFI on these boards.

#46
Genex

Genex

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 74 posts
So Netkas is going to give a new kernel of leopard, or osx86 project stops here.
Good, i miss Maxxuss. He was King.

#47
elRey

elRey

    InsanelyMac Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 273 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany
  • Interests:computing<br />producing music<br />range: progressive psytrance
netkas and all others will work on all, when leopard final is released
so take your time

#48
janderson7715

janderson7715

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

The whole point of using EFI is to be able to boot the stock apple kernel, system etc, from an EFI-enabled PC...

&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I am less concerned about using a stock a kernel then being able to take advantage of firmware functionality like BootCamp and BootSelector and TargetDisk Mode.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The original reason I was interested in EFI was to enable the use of Apple graphics drivers and with Natit and such that is no longer an issue.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;

... from what I understand, netkas's solution still requires a custom-compiled kernel and therefore really doesn't take us any further than where we are today...just afaik... there isn't much info around on this development.

What exactly has netkas accomplished on the EFI front, this is not clear to me:

Posted Image

#49
Genex

Genex

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 74 posts
how can one use a stock kernel withouth EFI ?
As i know many kext and kernel communicate with EFI info
So we need an Emulator Right ?

#50
frizbot

frizbot

    InsanelyMac Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 403 posts
One cannot use the stock kernel without EFI, and probably some apple boot software (boot.efi or something?). An emulator could work, by booting in BIOS and then into an EFI environment, or there needs to be a way to boot the motherboard into EFI.

The only way to get proper and full OS X support on PC hardware, is to have EFI working. It's why I truly hope that efforts will continue on MacEFIx86.

#51
re-book

re-book

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 55 posts
We still will need hacked kernels and also hacked drivers.
As far as I understand we could get rid of those ACPI-Kernels.
Using the native power management of those kernels would be a huge step especially for notebooks.
I think the most problems come from those ACPI-hacks. They are not working correct together with the closed-source development past 10.4.4.
I guess with a "near native" kernel we would have the hole features of the new mobile intel processors (dual core, dynamic speed step, e.c.t.).
Hopefully also brightness-control from displays.

re-book

#52
frizbot

frizbot

    InsanelyMac Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 403 posts
This gets into gray areas of my knowledge on the subject.

If EFI was made to work, then Apple's boot.efi could be made to run, perhaps without patching. Once into that environment, a retail copy of OS X would boot. It is possible that Apple has hardware detection in the kernel that looks beyond EFI, so that would need to be patched, but ACPI and the current hacky-configuration wouldn't be needed. With EFI, hardware support would be much more reliable (eg. nvidia), and more features would be supported properly (eg. speedstep).

I don't know much about the current hack, but OSX86 probably uses software from the original intel development kit (a P4 IIRC), and a number of patches from people who became famous in the community long ago. The current state of things is irrelevant to this thread, other than that an EFI-booting OSX86 wouldn't be a sketchy hack and would be reliable to boot OS X versions in the future.

#53
Kiko

Kiko

    You Dont Understand Me

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,889 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:United States Of Israel
boot.efi boots fine, just remove the header (which is basically deleteing a couple of bytes). and the only thing to bypass in the kernel is the efi crc. thats all you need to boot efi on DUET (also a modified efildr16 with vesa init hardcoded)

#54
frizbot

frizbot

    InsanelyMac Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 403 posts
There we are, thanks. So it requires a simple hex edit to boot.efi, and a relatively simple bypassing of a CRC check in the kernel (patch in the new CRC, or remove the check). These are much smaller patches than hacking additional functionality into the kernel as OSX86 has been doing.

If DUET is working, the Developer's UEFI Emulation T, then presumably it'll boot boot.efi with the small patch? Then progress must be stalled at removing the kernel's CRC check? Or the "apple EFI environment", something about decrypting files within their firmware? I don't know enough to help, so explaining these things to me is just for education, don't worry too much about it.


Not sure what "efildr16" is, google doesn't know either.

#55
Kiko

Kiko

    You Dont Understand Me

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,889 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:United States Of Israel
efildr16 = efi loader
progress is stalled with the fact that duet sort of sucks :P, and its much easier to hack a kernel for bios atm than it is to hack it for efi (well, for efi you have to first boot duet, then boot boot.efi, bios is just one load, much simpler imo)

#56
dave123

dave123

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Just Joined
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
what do you think about setting up a wiki and documenting everything in here?i just read trough the archive thread and there really were some interesting findings.look at the iphone dev wiki.they were able to do some heavy lifting because they were able to colaborate in a very effective way using a wiki.maybe we could even attract some of theme working on macefix86.

update:
i just had an idea, dont know if it's stupid. probably you guys already tried that, but i'll tell it anyway.maybe it's that simple/stupid, that noone tried it so far :-)what about taking a mainboard which is very close to the original mac pro mainboard,flashing a somewhat broken and half assed hacked apple-efi-version (extracted from a real macpro board)and than trying to use the apple mac pro firmware restoration cd in order to let it do the job and get a working apple efi on the chip?bad idea? probably... :-)

#57
Erhnam

Erhnam

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 66 posts

update:
i just had an idea, dont know if it's stupid. probably you guys already tried that, but i'll tell it anyway.maybe it's that simple/stupid, that noone tried it so far :-)what about taking a mainboard which is very close to the original mac pro mainboard,flashing a somewhat broken and half assed hacked apple-efi-version (extracted from a real macpro board)and than trying to use the apple mac pro firmware restoration cd in order to let it do the job and get a working apple efi on the chip?bad idea? probably... :-)


There's also a drm chip on every Apple board so this is not going to work. Since some parts of code for all kind of drivers are moved to EFI you will also need to flash the rom of your video card for example. For example the driver for a very complicated onboard ide (raid)chip could be moved to EFI. The complicated onboard ide (raid)chip will talk to EFI and EFI will present the chip to the operating systeem like a standard ide chip. That's the way EFI works and that's the reason why we need a lot of drivers for all kind of chipsets (ICH7, ICH8 and so on).

The current Intel boards use EFI and emulates a bios, so you pretty close with that kind of motherboard. The only way would be to hack EFI, extract indeed the EFI from a hacked Apple and combine things together. The more a motherboards differs from a Apple motherboard the more drivers we need to program for EFI.

#58
Kiko

Kiko

    You Dont Understand Me

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,889 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:United States Of Israel
there is no drm/tpm on apple motherboards, it is a common myth. EFI can be flashed to a motherboard and it will work, sort of. Some parts will not be mapped properly (i.e: USB wont work, or audio ports will be switched)

#59
josftx

josftx

    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 68 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chile

efildr16 = efi loader
progress is stalled with the fact that duet sort of sucks :thumbsup_anim: , and its much easier to hack a kernel for bios atm than it is to hack it for efi (well, for efi you have to first boot duet, then boot boot.efi, bios is just one load, much simpler imo)


why if much easier to hack a kernel for bios than for efi, because the kernel patches doesn't have a full hardware support and many other issues and the efi hack that made netkas has full hardware support?

#60
Kiko

Kiko

    You Dont Understand Me

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,889 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:United States Of Israel
netkas never had full hardware support lol. the kernel doesnt support any hardware, thats all done with kexts. efi will give you many more issues than the way we have it at the moment, now maybe a firmware based solution would be good. But that isnt going to happen as far as i can see.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

© 2014 InsanelyMac  |   News  |   Forum  |   Downloads  |   OSx86 Wiki  |   Mac Netbook  |   PHP hosting by CatN  |   Designed by Ed Gain  |   Logo by irfan  |   Privacy Policy