Hi, Sorry, I should have mentioned that-- I did actually have Secure Boot disabled prior to all of my runs (verified, still disabled), and tried CSM on and off both just to see if that affected it. None of this changed the error output, with exception to the Security Chip setting. Within the Security Chip subset of settings, there wasn't anything more fine-grained that I could disable to try and narrow it down. On Mar 18, 2016 6:56 PM, "Tomoaki AOKI" <junch...@dec.sakura.ne.jp> wrote:
> Hi. > > Is there any setting about"Secure Boot"? > *Maybe all Windoze7 (or later) generation ThinkPads would have it. > > If so, disable it INSTEAD OF "Security Chip" and try. > > > On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 15:54:46 -0500 > Kyle Evans <kevan...@ksu.edu> wrote: > > > Hello! > > > > I recently purchased an older Thinkpad Yoga 11e and now I've installed > > 10.3RC2 to it. It appears that the Security Chip feature causes > > problems in attempting to boot 10.3RC2 (and a slightly older -CURRENT, > > as well, but re-tested with 10.3RC2 just for the sake of > > verification). The following output is written when attempting to boot > > from the `amd64-uefi-memstick.img`: > > > > == > > > > >> FreeBSD EFI boot block > > Loader path: /boot/loader.efi > > LoadImage failed with error 2 > > HandleProtocol failed with error 2 > > StartImage failed with error 2 > > panic: Load failed > > > > == > > > > Rebooting and disabling the security chip fixes this, and everything > > runs along nicely. Re-enabling the Security Chip after 10.3RC2 is > > installed and attempting a boot yields the slightly different (while > > slightly expected, given the above, but I'm adding this anyways): > > > > == > > > > >> FreeBSD EFI boot block > > Loader Path: /boot/loader.efi > > > > Initializing modules: ZFS UFS > > Probing 4 block devices. . . . . .* done > > ZFS found the following pools: zroot > > UFS found no partitions > > Failed to load image provided by ZFS, size: 2033504512, (2) > > panic: No bootable partitions found! > > > > == > > > > Is this expected behavior? I was under the impression that the > > "Security Chip" was largely unrelated to anything in the boot process. > > _______________________________________________ > > firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list > > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > > > > > -- > Tomoaki AOKI junch...@dec.sakura.ne.jp > _______________________________________________ > email@example.com mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"