That works for me too. Using a 64-bit kernel and creating the EFI file in the efi partition with the kernel boot parameters built into the kernel. Also built efibootmgr utility.
On 1/11/2013 11:13 PM, Craig Magee wrote: > I use UEFI by putting the kernel and an (optional) initrd in the EFI > partition. The kernel has EFI stubs if you enable the option. > You can pass kernel parameters in the UEFI boot entry or put them in > the kernel itself. Both options are available towards the bottom of > 'Processor type and features' in the kernel configuration. > The only gotcha is booting 32-bit, my UEFI system only supports > booting 64-bit so I had to install a 64-bit GRUB to then boot a 32-bit > kernel. > > I find UEFI is actually pretty neat and removes the need for an > additional bootloader. Anytime I want to boot anything other than the > default (including from CD or USB) I press the escape key and select > the option I want. GPT partitioning rocks as well (though you don't > need to use UEFI to take advantage of that using Linux; you do for > Windows). > > > On 31 October 2013 06:02, Casey Daniels <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > On 10/30/2013 12:47 PM, Dan McGhee wrote: > > On 10/30/2013 11:26 AM, Casey Daniels wrote: > >> On 10/30/2013 12:17 PM, Dan McGhee wrote: > >>> Anyway, I just wanted to share what I have discovered. This > may lead to > >>> posts like, "I did this and it didn't work. The book needs to be > >>> changed." The implementation of LFS, configuring and > installing both > >>> the kernel and GRUB can be successful regardless of how the > BIOS boots. > >>> There is a learning curve though. And some of GRUB's building and > >>> installing arguments need to be a little different. > >>> > >>> Dan > >>> > >> I played with UEFI Boot for almost a week and couldn't get > anywhere with > >> it. I could get Grub Loaded, and and I could get grub to find the > >> Kernel, but then it would ALWAYS fail at some memory point > during the > >> Kernel load, and I played and played with the kernel for that > week and > >> it keep freezing at the same point. > >> > >> The thing with UEFI Boot is you don't need Grub to boot if you > don't > >> want to. If you have a Linux only or Windows only, computer > you can > >> actually boot with out user input without a bootloader. From my > >> understanding though if you have a dualboot system you need at > a minimum > >> a boot manager to boot without user intervention. If you don't > mind > >> typing a few commands you can boot with out a boot manager or > bootloader > >> in a dual boot system, you just have to understand the UEFI > Shell you get. > >> > >> Casey > > Casey, your experience confirms what I have learned by reading > and my > > own experience. Yes, on dual boot you need a manager to get to the > > loader you want. That's one of the functions of the EFI partition. I > > don't want to address your specific situation until I have practical > > experience with my LFS build and that won't be for a couple of > more days. > > > > If you have not been successful in booting your LFS system and > you want > > to "play," I recommend turning off secure boot, checking your kernel > > configuration to support efi and running <grub-install --help> > to select > > the arguments you use for grub. I just finished reading > "grub-install" > > and it looks like it should detect your partition type--MBR or > GPT. I > > don't want to suggest anything definite because I haven't > "proved" them > > with my own experience. One of the possible outcomes is that your > > computer won't boot. I would rather be the victim of my own > eperiments > > rather than having someone else be that victim. :) > > > > Dan > > > I had no problem getting the Boot Loader working, surpurising > enough, though I did learn that in order to get grub to do a > proper UEFI > Install, the system your installing it from had to have booted from > UEFI. I had Grub find the Kernel in the proper place, and start to > load, but the Intel board I use does some type of Memory Check and > always fails at the same Memory Address. So I don't know if I had > some > incompatable Option in my Kernel or there is a issue with Intel's UEFI > Implentation (Which from what I was able to read on the subject this > might be the case, I think it trys to protect that Memory Address and > the Linux Kernel trys to get into that specific Address). Yes I did > have Secure boot turned off. > I really don't care about UEFI boot for the current hardware > of my > servers, but from my understanding is my Intel Boards are UEFI boards > that emulate the orginal BIOS for Compability reasons, however some > boards are already coming out as UEFI only and it probably won't > be too > long before most boards don't have a legacy mode. > > Casey > -- > http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html > Unsubscribe: See the above information page > > > >
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
