[PATCH 1/1] cmd: simplify command efidebug

[Ilias Apalodimas]

Akashi-san

[...]

> > > > >         "\n"
> > > > >   #endif
> > > > > -       "efidebug devices\n"
> > > > > -       "  - show UEFI devices\n"
> > > > >         "efidebug drivers\n"
> > > > >         "  - show UEFI drivers\n"
> > > > >         "efidebug dh\n"
> > > > > --
> > > > > 2.37.2
> > > > >
> >
> >
> > FWIW the clean does make sense to me.  First of all displaying handles +
> > device is more convenient and it's going to become even more important as
> > the EFI<->DM integration moves on.  Not to mention that efidebug is a
> > misnomer (now) it is used for *configuring* boot options.
>
> It's not true.
> From the beginning, it was seen as a "debugging" tool.
> In fact, when I implemented it at the first time, I named it efishell
> and later proposed alternative names, efiutil and even eficonfig(!) but
> all were rejected by then-maintainer simply because he saw the command
> to be a debugging tool.

That's why I said *now*.  It was a debugging tool way back.  Right now
we use it to configure the efibootmgr and that's why I proposed
splitting efidebug and and 'efi' command way back.

> This positioning has not been changed since then.
>
> > We should try
> > to make the command as lightweight as possible, since people are literally
> > expected to include it in their binary if they want to boot via EFI
>
> I believe that Kojima-san's eficonfig can fill the requirements
> as we all expect.

Not really.  What about CI tools that rely on the cmd line to test the
efibootmgr?  We should force all of them to convert to a CI testing
that can interpret menus?

Cheers
/Ilias
>
> -Takahiro Akashi
>
>
> > Reviewed-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas at linaro.org>
> >
> > Regards
> > /Ilias