In D23662#519935, @theraven wrote:

This looks fine, but please submit it as a GitHub PR so that it goes through CI (I can't imagine it failing).

Remove the print statement in the default handler.

In D23662#519454, @emaste wrote:

change should also go here: https://github.com/davidchisnall/dtc

Committed in https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revision&revision=525460 .

@araujo Could you approve my latest changes please? I ran poudriere and put the successful results at:

In D23476#516471, @araujo wrote:

OK, as soon as the poudriere get the results, share it here.

In D23476#516466, @araujo wrote:

Did you test it using poudriere?

In D23476#516323, @mat wrote:

Fine by me.

Simplify change to just the PYTHON_CMD fix.

In D23486#516054, @araujo wrote:

How are you testing these changes that you didn't catch this problem before?

And I know there are several problems with the Makefile, which I've learned through my updates to the uefi-edk2-bhyve port. But I'd like to get this fix committed and then, once the changes to uefi-edk2-bhyve are committed I'll fix the issues with this port based on what I've learned.

Unfortunately this has broken the port for anyone without python 2.7 installed. Could somebody approve me to commit this fix please?
@araujo @mat ?

Thanks for the feedback, and sorry about all the mistakes!

• Fix some more issues from the review feedback.

• MAKE_ARGS should be earlier in the Makefile

• Fix variables ordering

@mat I've updated the Makefile to be similar to sysutils/uefi-edk2-qemu - which involved removing BASH_CMD (replacing it with just 'bash'), removing USE_GCC and some other changes. I'd appreciate feedback about whether these changes are better or worse!

• Move DEBUG_VARS, DEBUG_VARS_OFF and HTTP_BOOT_VARS to before OPTIONS

• Remove sysutils/uefi-edk2-bhyve-devel from sysutils/Makefile

• Update port Makefile to be similar in style to uefi-edk2-qemu

In D23466#515069, @araujo wrote:

If you will remove the port, why botter to update it and trigger hooks around to rebuild the package?
Focus here, if your intention is to remove the package: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D23476

• Update MOVED to show that uefi-edk2-bhyve-devel is now uefi-edk2-bhyve

Could a ports committer commit this for me, please?

Remove PORTREVISION.

Revert unrelated change to sysutils/uefi-edk2-bhyve port

Fixed in r356740 (https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=356740).

In D22979#507973, @ryan_freqlabs.com wrote:

Thank you! :)

In D22979#504080, @ryan_freqlabs.com wrote:

@bcran Thanks! Would you mind committing this for me? I don't have the bit.

In D22062#482064, @kevans wrote:

Actually yes, this change isn't correct. See https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/blob/master/MdePkg/Library/UefiMemoryAllocationLib/MemoryAllocationLib.c for an example of how to allocate aligned memory (InternalAllocateAlignedPages etc.)

In D21580#470252, @araujo wrote:

You have my approve to commit it! Thank you!

In D21580#470248, @araujo wrote:

USE_GCC will set build-time and run-time dependency, if we need only build-time dependency the patch looks good to me.

Fix USES.

Fix GCC_DEFAULT.

Restore Makefile.depend

In D20562#466721, @emaste wrote:

Is stand/efi/boot1/Makefile.depend supposed to be deleted?

Keep building boot1.efi

In D20562#463153, @emaste wrote:

Since makefs fat support has been committed, proceed with removing all the EFI FAT code.

In D21281#463691, @bcran wrote:

Huh, I'm seeing some really odd stuff in there right from the very first time we call it, way before the crash (and when connecting using both HTTP and HTTPS):

In D21281#463005, @scottph wrote:

In D21281#462767, @imp wrote:

Fixed another place where we try and open a file without first calling
efihttp_dev_close and efihttp_dev_open.

In D21281#462739, @scottph wrote:

Is this error case something that happens only sometimes? Fetching multiple files is something that has definitely worked for me before.

In D19976#456807, @araujo wrote:

ping!!!

In D20765#449872, @greg_unrelenting.technology wrote:

I'm going through my list of reviews and noticed this one. Does it need more work, or can it be committed?

@yuripv Are you still planning to commit this?

I committed a temporary fix to increase the size to 100MB on x64 in r349471.