v2023.12.2

What's Changed

• CryptoBinPkg: Add INFs generated with correct depex. @apop5 (#95)
  
  Change Details

    ## Description

  #94 Updated the generate_cryptodriver.py script to include the correct path to the DEPEX binary, but it failed to include the newly generated INF files.

  Now updating with the correctly generated INF files.

  For each item, place an "x" in between [ and ] if true. Example: [x].
  (you can also check items in the GitHub UI)

  • Impacts functionality?
    • Functionality - Does the change ultimately impact how firmware functions?
    • Examples: Add a new library, publish a new PPI, update an algorithm, ...
  • Impacts security?
    • Security - Does the change have a direct security impact on an application,
      flow, or firmware?
    • Examples: Crypto algorithm change, buffer overflow fix, parameter
      validation improvement, ...
  • Breaking change?
    • Breaking change - Will anyone consuming this change experience a break
      in build or boot behavior?
    • Examples: Add a new library class, move a module to a different repo, call
      a function in a new library class in a pre-existing module, ...
  • Includes tests?
    • Tests - Does the change include any explicit test code?
    • Examples: Unit tests, integration tests, robot tests, ...
  • Includes documentation?
    • Documentation - Does the change contain explicit documentation additions
      outside direct code modifications (and comments)?
    • Examples: Update readme file, add feature readme file, link to documentation
      on an a separate Web page, ...

  How This Was Tested

  Ran local build, replaced in mu_tiano_platforms and verified build failures were resolved (and q35 project booted).

  Integration Instructions

  N/A
  

  
  

  ---

  
  

🐛 Bug Fixes

• CryptoBinPkg: Updated DEPEX statement in generated INF files to match new location @apop5 (#94)
  
  Change Details

    ## Description

  In packages generated before 2023.11.3, the generated INF files would reference a common DEPEX file for all the arches instead of being contained in the same folder as the generated EFI file.

  After the update for including map files, etc, the location of the DEPEX was in in the same folder as the EFI, MAP and PDB file.
  Updating the script generate the correct file location for the DEPEX.

  • Impacts functionality?
    • Functionality - Does the change ultimately impact how firmware functions?
    • Examples: Add a new library, publish a new PPI, update an algorithm, ...
  • Impacts security?
    • Security - Does the change have a direct security impact on an application,
      flow, or firmware?
    • Examples: Crypto algorithm change, buffer overflow fix, parameter
      validation improvement, ...
  • Breaking change?
    • Breaking change - Will anyone consuming this change experience a break
      in build or boot behavior?
    • Examples: Add a new library class, move a module to a different repo, call
      a function in a new library class in a pre-existing module, ...
  • Includes tests?
    • Tests - Does the change include any explicit test code?
    • Examples: Unit tests, integration tests, robot tests, ...
  • Includes documentation?
    • Documentation - Does the change contain explicit documentation additions
      outside direct code modifications (and comments)?
    • Examples: Update readme file, add feature readme file, link to documentation
      on an a separate Web page, ...

  How This Was Tested

  Manually updated a project to use 2023.11.5 and encountered a build error because of the depex file path was mismatched.

  Integration Instructions

  N/A
  

  
  

  ---

  
  

Full Changelog: v2024.0.0...v2024.0.1