Hello Jan, Quirin, Christian,
CC: Iwamatsu-san,

Just for your information, based on our internal requests,
Iwamatsu-san uploaded efibootguard package (and its build dependencies)
to bullseye-backports [1] and it's now available.

In response to this, efibootguard is (will be) enabled in bullseye-backports swupdate [2].
We internally tested the both (efibootguard and swupdate) in bullseye-backports
then confirm the basic A/B update is working.

Though backports packages are less maintained than the packages in the official releases,
it would be that the packages are used more widely.
I'm not sure if you have plans to replace the current efibootguard/swupdate in isar-cip-core by
backports ones from now, but let me know any possibilities.

[1] https://packages.debian.org/bullseye-backports/efibootguard
[2] https://salsa.debian.org/debian/swupdate/-/commit/6b833d909145c74c050e1934cc573c3b380d4f19

Best regards,
Kazu

On 14.03.23 08:45, kazuhiro3.hayashi@... wrote:

Hello Jan, Quirin, Christian,
CC: Iwamatsu-san,

Just for your information, based on our internal requests,
Iwamatsu-san uploaded efibootguard package (and its build dependencies)
to bullseye-backports [1] and it's now available.

In response to this, efibootguard is (will be) enabled in bullseye-backports swupdate [2].
We internally tested the both (efibootguard and swupdate) in bullseye-backports
then confirm the basic A/B update is working.

Though backports packages are less maintained than the packages in the official releases,
it would be that the packages are used more widely.
I'm not sure if you have plans to replace the current efibootguard/swupdate in isar-cip-core by
backports ones from now, but let me know any possibilities.

Thanks for the info and for enabling this. It's surely valuable in case
there are no needs for patches against EBG. Currently, the only reason
for a self-built EBG is RISC-V support. That may change again, though.

So we will keep both options, using the official package by default but
permitting to select the self-built one on per-machine basis, e.g.

Jan

[1] https://packages.debian.org/bullseye-backports/efibootguard
[2] https://salsa.debian.org/debian/swupdate/-/commit/6b833d909145c74c050e1934cc573c3b380d4f19

Best regards,
Kazu

--
Siemens AG, Technology
Competence Center Embedded Linux

Hello Jan,

Thank you for your feedback.

[...]

Thanks for the info and for enabling this. It's surely valuable in case
there are no needs for patches against EBG. Currently, the only reason
for a self-built EBG is RISC-V support. That may change again, though.

So we will keep both options, using the official package by default but
permitting to select the self-built one on per-machine basis, e.g.

Make sense.
In order to directly use the binary packages, I'm guessing some
package profile related settings like below need to be updated
https://gitlab.com/cip-project/cip-core/isar-cip-core/-/blob/6d3e5749/recipes-core/swupdate/swupdate_2021.11-1%2Bdebian-gbp.bb#L30-32
but they should be not so complicated to adjust..

Best regards,
Kazu

Jan

[1] https://packages.debian.org/bullseye-backports/efibootguard
[2]

https://salsa.debian.org/debian/swupdate/-/commit/6b833d909145c74c050
e1934cc573c3b380d4f19

Best regards,
Kazu

--
Siemens AG, Technology
Competence Center Embedded Linux