On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 1:12 PM Chris Murphy <li...@colorremedies.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 26, 2022, at 4:06 PM, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > > > As I already mentioned the last time this has come up: Why can we not, > > instead of chainloading Windows directly, chainload a systemd-boot > > configured to always bootnext to Windows? > > Pretty sure shim still hard codes the name grub$arch.efi as the 2nd > bootloader. Hence having to rename sd-boot as grubx64.efi for shim to find > and run it. They can't co-exist right now. Also, there's no current plan by > anyone to add systemd-boot for Secure Boot signing. > > >GRUB would still think it boots > > Windows directly. (I do not see why it would notice any difference, all that > > would change is the name of the image that gets chainloaded.) And systemd- > > boot does not need to know that it is being chainloaded from GRUB. So I do > > not see why that would not work, without any changes to the software. >
Put more directly: Microsoft will revoke our shim if we use anything but GRUB as the stage-two bootloader. Cf. https://github.com/rhboot/shim/issues/472#issuecomment-1118628769 -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
