On Wed, Jul 27, 2022, at 2:36 PM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > On 27/07/2022 18:53, Chris Murphy wrote: >> Boot Loader Spec defines $BOOT as either EFI System partition (ESP) or >> Extended Boot Loader Partition (XBOOTLDR), and in effect they need to be FAT >> in order to fulfill the interoperability intent of the spec, because it is a >> shared $BOOT across all distros. > > You can use any FS you want with efifs[1].
Yeah, but it's impractical: * $BOOT is supposed to be readable by all distros that share $BOOT * efifs drivers must be signed in order to be loaded on UEFI Secure Boot enabled systems * shim is distro specific, and is what provides the key for efifs as well as the 2nd stage bootloader There are already enough barriers to Boot Loader Spec adoption. But this would be too big a barrier. Again though, I think the sd-boot discussions really need to go in a separate thread so they have the proper visibility rather than being hidden in an rather distinctly unrelated thread. In this thread we need to focus on solutions for the immediate problem of dual boot with Bitlocker enabled. -- Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ 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
