No. There is no FUD there. We should discuss before giving it a try. We cannot keep changing rapidly in Cooker if we wish to stabilise. Colin brings up a good point, asking the question of "how will gummiboot be used" and if there are any real advantages to us. I do not see systemd integration as a benefit at this stage, unless other distributions move towards this and there are other advantages.
On 26 May 2015 at 10:05, Tomasz Gajc <[email protected]> wrote: > Please stop FUD, as without any tests how EFI integration inside systemd > will work, is hard to make any judgements. > EFI integration with systemd is focused on security to just to be safe that > chain load was not breached. > > First we should give it a try, then let's discuss. > > > 2015-05-26 10:35 GMT+02:00 Colin Close <[email protected]>: >> >> Here is some information on Gummiboot which give some insight to the >> bootmanagers abilities. >> http://www.rodsbooks.com/efi-bootloaders/gummiboot.html. >> See here for a fairly comprehensive comparison of booloaders >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_boot_loaders. >> >> If the intention is to use gummiboot to simply chainload grub2 so that >> boot information can be passed to systemd then this may have some advantages >> if one wished to optimise the already satisfactory boot times then there >> may some justification for a change. >> >> If the intention is to replace the current bootloader entirely then the >> following should be considered. >> >> 1. A significant amount of time and effort has been expended by a number >> of individuals to ensure that Grub2 EFI works properly on our distribution. >> Much work has been done to also ensure that dual-booting with Windows 8/8.1 >> is functional. Changing at this stage represents a sever waste of resources >> and is demotivating for all those involved >> 2. Our current bootloader approach both for iso's and installed systems >> has been evaluated on many different types of hardware over two releases. We >> cannot say this for Gummiboot. >> 3. Grub2 contains pre-written scripts to allow automated update of the the >> configuration when new or different kernels are installed. Gummiboot does >> not support this. Though there may be third party tools that address this >> deficiency. >> 4. Gummiboot offers no GUI though there is the ability to display a >> bootsplash. >> 5: If at some point we wish to support secure boot (we will probably be >> forced into it eventually) gummiboot cannot use Fedora's shim approach to >> secure boot. On the plus side though gummiboot will most likely work with >> Linux Foundations Pre-Boot loader an alternative to Fedora's shim >> 6: Some consideration should be given to timescales we are very behind on >> the release plan; adding another "new" thing which has the possibility of >> creating further delay may be unwise. >> >> The leading question is "how will gummiboot be used?" >> >> Colin Close >> QA Team >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OM-Cooker mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://ml.openmandriva.org/listinfo.cgi/om-cooker-openmandriva.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > OM-Cooker mailing list > [email protected] > http://ml.openmandriva.org/listinfo.cgi/om-cooker-openmandriva.org -- cheers, Robert :: github.com/robxu9 _______________________________________________ OM-Cooker mailing list [email protected] http://ml.openmandriva.org/listinfo.cgi/om-cooker-openmandriva.org
