sysutils/uefi-edk2-bhyve: add slave port with CSM enabled

[novel]

Summary

Both slave and master could be installed at the same time as they install firmware with different name depending if CSM was activated or not.

While here, change direct dependency on gcc to USE_GCC in uefi-edk2-bhyve.

Test Plan

Both ports tested with poudriere.

[fabian.freyer_physik.tu-berlin.de]

tbh, I'd argue for a -csm port, and make no csm the default - but I guess this should be discussed. But this would also be fine for me.

[novel]

Reworked to have -csm slave port and the main port without CSM.

Also, I noticed that I need to drop the CSM option at all to avoid conflicts with the slave port.

[fabian.freyer_physik.tu-berlin.de]

TBH, we should also bump the port version here.

[fabian.freyer_physik.tu-berlin.de]

uefi-edk2-bhyve/Makefile

9

PORTREVISION=1

[fabian.freyer_physik.tu-berlin.de]

uefi-edk2-bhyve/Makefile

20

@editor_callfortesting.org suggested we change this to ${PREFIX}/share/uefi-firmware/ since firmware is considered plural

48

s/uefi-firmwares/uefi-firmware/

[fabian.freyer_physik.tu-berlin.de]

uefi-edk2-bhyve/Makefile

30

I think these could be removed

[fabian.freyer_physik.tu-berlin.de]

uefi-edk2-bhyve-csm/Makefile

5

s/with/without

[editor_callfortesting.org]

I can't help but notice that there is a /usr/share/firmware directory.

Should this simply be used?

[fabian.freyer_physik.tu-berlin.de]

In D7145#150327, @editor_callfortesting.org wrote:

I can't help but notice that there is a /usr/share/firmware directory.

Should this simply be used?

I don't think so; we should respect ${PREFIX}. Also it's useful to have a folder containing only UEFI Firmware since bhyve managers (e.g. libvirt) would list these.