Bug#789798: Bug#792547 / Bug#789798: grub-installer / grub2: add option to _not_ install to UEFI boot order

2020-08-23 Thread Holger Wansing
> Ian Jackson writes ("Bug#792547: grub-installer: add option to _not_ install > to UEFI boot order"): > > I see that Ian C updated this patch (in July 2015) and reported > > testing it successfully. Is it now OK ? > > every Debian release I update our

Bug#789798: Bug#792547: grub-installer: add option to _not_ install to UEFI boot order

2019-09-24 Thread Ian Jackson
Ian Jackson writes ("Bug#792547: grub-installer: add option to _not_ install to UEFI boot order"): > I see that Ian C updated this patch (in July 2015) and reported > testing it successfully. Is it now OK ? every Debian release I update our workaround to apply to the current rel

Processed: Re: Bug#931917: grub-installer: call efibootmgr (if available) to keep track of boot order/options

2019-07-13 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > tag -1 patch Bug #931917 [grub-installer] grub-installer: call efibootmgr (if available) to keep track of boot order/options Added tag(s) patch. -- 931917: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=931917 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact

Bug#931917: grub-installer: call efibootmgr (if available) to keep track of boot order/options

2019-07-13 Thread Cyril Brulebois
Control: tag -1 patch Cyril Brulebois (2019-07-12): > With stretch, we were getting efibootmgr's output in the installer's > syslog, which could help track down issues related to the boot sequence. > > With buster, due to grub2's switch to using libefi* (since both the > 2.02+dfsg1-14 and 2.02+d

Bug#931917: grub-installer: call efibootmgr (if available) to keep track of boot order/options

2019-07-12 Thread Cyril Brulebois
Package: grub-installer Version: 1.165 Severity: important With stretch, we were getting efibootmgr's output in the installer's syslog, which could help track down issues related to the boot sequence. With buster, due to grub2's switch to using libefi* (since both the 2.02+dfsg1-14 and 2.02+dfsg1

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-28 Thread Dan Norton
all if you don't add a boot > entry for it? The grub is installed by this installer after. > > There is nothing that makes the latest install boot unless you add it > to the boot order. On legacy bios it was different because there you > just put what you wanted into the MBR boot

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-28 Thread Lennart Sorensen
min intervenes. Where in this process is a > requirement to tinker with the UEFI menu? How are you supposed to get grub to run at all if you don't add a boot entry for it? The grub is installed by this installer after. There is nothing that makes the latest install boot unless you add

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-28 Thread Ian Campbell
On Wed, 2018-02-28 at 02:16 +, Steve McIntyre wrote: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 09:01:18PM -0500, Dan Norton wrote: > > On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 10:40:20 -0500 > > lsore...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen) wrote: > > > > > > With UEFI, adding an entry to the boot meny is what you do when > > >

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-27 Thread Steve McIntyre
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 09:01:18PM -0500, Dan Norton wrote: >On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 10:40:20 -0500 >lsore...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen) wrote: >> >> With UEFI, adding an entry to the boot meny is what you do when you >> install an OS you want to be able to boot. UEFI does not rely on the

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-27 Thread Dan Norton
the term "Hard Drive" is > > replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in the boot > > order. > > > > The PC is: > > Hewlett-Packard HP Pro 3400 Series MT/2ABF, BIOS 7.16 03/23/2012 > > > > Please tell me the justification for

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-27 Thread Lennart Sorensen
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 05:42:36PM -0500, Dan Norton wrote: > I would hate to have to do something because windows does it :-) > > No one's yet mentioned secure boot as a justification. AIUI some > manufacturers are making it so that you can't even disable secure boot. > How will you multi-boot li

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-26 Thread Geert Stappers
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 05:42:36PM -0500, Dan Norton wrote: > No one's yet mentioned secure boot as a justification. AIUI some > manufacturers are making it so that you can't even disable secure boot. > How will you multi-boot linux and windows, or replace windows entirely > with such a machine? T

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-26 Thread Dan Norton
the term "Hard Drive" is > > replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in the boot > > order. > > > > The PC is: > > Hewlett-Packard HP Pro 3400 Series MT/2ABF, BIOS 7.16 03/23/2012 > > > > Please tell me the justification for

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-26 Thread Dan Norton
t; debian > >> ATAPI CD/DVD Drive > >> USB Floppy/CD > >> USB Hard Drive > >>Legacy Boot Sources > >> [...] > >> > >>If done by firmware, wouldn't grub or the installer have to tell > >>the firmware to put "debian&qu

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-26 Thread Ian Campbell
On Mon, 2018-02-26 at 16:54 +, Steve McIntyre wrote: > It seems Dan Norton has decided to selfishly make *his* spam problem > into everybody else's spam problem, and I've just had a bounce > message > in response to my mail below, saying I have to ask to be added to his > list of allowed sender

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-26 Thread Steve McIntyre
USB Floppy/CD >> USB Hard Drive >>Legacy Boot Sources >> [...] >> >>If done by firmware, wouldn't grub or the installer have to tell >>the firmware to put "debian" in the bios menu and make it first? In its >>past life, this PC ran Windows

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-26 Thread Steve McIntyre
t grub or the installer have to tell >the firmware to put "debian" in the bios menu and make it first? In its >past life, this PC ran Windows 7 but in order to boot from mountable >media there was no need for the user to change the boot order. You've been bitten by an unexpected

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-26 Thread Steve McIntyre
t; is >> replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in the boot order. >> >> The PC is: >> Hewlett-Packard HP Pro 3400 Series MT/2ABF, BIOS 7.16 03/23/2012 >> >> Please tell me the justification for putting "debian" in the menu and

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-26 Thread Lennart Sorensen
On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 10:18:00PM -0500, Dan Norton wrote: > Installing either stretch or buster via netinst results in changes to > the bios menu. Under "UEFI Boot Sources" the term "Hard Drive" is > replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in th

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-26 Thread Ian Campbell
gt; > Installing either stretch or buster via netinst results in changes > > > > to the bios menu. Under "UEFI Boot Sources" the term "Hard Drive" > > > > is replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in the boot > > >

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-25 Thread Dan Norton
o the bios menu. Under "UEFI Boot Sources" the term "Hard Drive" > > > is replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in the boot > > > order. > > > > > > The PC is: > > > Hewlett-Packard HP Pro 3400 Series MT/2ABF, BIOS 7.1

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-25 Thread Richard Owlett
On 02/25/2018 02:35 AM, Ian Campbell wrote: On Sat, 2018-02-24 at 14:18 -0600, Richard Owlett wrote: On 02/24/2018 01:59 PM, Dan Norton wrote: [snip] In my case, there are multiple debian installations and the installer positions the last installation at the top of the *grub* menu. This make

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-25 Thread Ian Campbell
On Sat, 2018-02-24 at 14:18 -0600, Richard Owlett wrote: > On 02/24/2018 01:59 PM, Dan Norton wrote: > > [snip] > > > > In my case, there are multiple debian installations and the > installer > > positions the last installation at the top of the *grub* menu. This > > makes sense. > > Not always.

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-24 Thread Richard Owlett
created menu entries in partition number order. With your many installs, have you needed to edit the bios menu so that you could boot something mountable? IOW is debian first in the boot order? I have older machines. I only encounter a so-called legacy bios. E.G. I type this on a Lenovo T51

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-24 Thread Dan Norton
d love to see an os-prober which > created menu entries in partition number order. > With your many installs, have you needed to edit the bios menu so that you could boot something mountable? IOW is debian first in the boot order? > > > > But why change the *bios* menu? Wi

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-24 Thread Richard Owlett
f done by firmware, wouldn't grub or the installer have to tell the firmware to put "debian" in the bios menu and make it first? In its past life, this PC ran Windows 7 but in order to boot from mountable media there was no need for the user to change the boot order. - Dan

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-24 Thread Dan Norton
gt; replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in the boot > > order. > > > > The PC is: > > Hewlett-Packard HP Pro 3400 Series MT/2ABF, BIOS 7.16 03/23/2012 > > > > Please tell me the justification for putting "debian" in the menu

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-24 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Fri, 2018-02-23 at 22:18 -0500, Dan Norton wrote: > Installing either stretch or buster via netinst results in changes to > the bios menu. Under "UEFI Boot Sources" the term "Hard Drive" is > replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in the boot o

Re: Boot Order

2018-02-23 Thread Geert Stappers
On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 10:18:00PM -0500, Dan Norton wrote: > Installing either stretch or buster via netinst results in changes to > the bios menu. Under "UEFI Boot Sources" the term "Hard Drive" is > replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in th

Boot Order

2018-02-23 Thread Dan Norton
Installing either stretch or buster via netinst results in changes to the bios menu. Under "UEFI Boot Sources" the term "Hard Drive" is replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in the boot order. The PC is: Hewlett-Packard HP Pro 3400 Series MT/2ABF, BIOS 7

Bug#789798: Bug#792547: Bug#789798: grub-installer: add option to _not_ install to UEFI boot order

2015-07-16 Thread Ian Campbell
Debian was added to the boot order as expected). In the installed system I then installed the updated version of grub2 and manually confirmed that /var/cache/debconf/config.dat had the new option set to true and that having deleted Debian from the boot order dpkg-reconfigure grub-efi-amd64 put it ba

Processed: Bug#789798: grub-installer: add option to _not_ install to UEFI boot order

2015-07-16 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > block 789798 by 792547 Bug #789798 [grub-installer] grub-installer: add option to _not_ install to UEFI boot order 789798 was blocked by: 792547 789798 was not blocking any bugs. Ignoring request to alter blocking bugs of bug #789798 to the same blocks previou

Processed: Bug#789798: grub-installer: add option to _not_ install to UEFI boot order

2015-07-16 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > block 789798 by 792547 Bug #789798 [grub-installer] grub-installer: add option to _not_ install to UEFI boot order 789798 was not blocked by any bugs. 789798 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 789798: 792547 -- 789798: http://bugs.debian.org/

Bug#789798: grub-installer: add option to _not_ install to UEFI boot order

2015-07-16 Thread Ian Campbell
Control: block 789798 by 792547 I've tested both of these patches (grub-installer [0] and grub2 [1] together but the grub-installer one doesn't do much without the grub2 one, since it appears that the installation of the grub-* packages also ends up running grub-install during installation. Ian.

Bug#789798: Updated patch to "add option to _not_ install to UEFI boot order"

2015-07-16 Thread Ian Campbell
:17:40 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Allow avoiding installation to NVRAM on EFI or IEEE1275 systems On systems which demand greater control over the boot order (e.g. ones which PXE boot) it is useful to avoid messing with this during installation. (Closes: #789798) --- debian/changelog

Bug#789798: grub-installer: add option to _not_ install to UEFI boot order

2015-07-01 Thread Ian Campbell
On Wed, 2015-06-24 at 16:02 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > +# Should we avoid installing/registering GRUB in NVRAM? > + db_input low grub-installer/no-nvram || [ $? -eq 30 ] > + db_go || exit 10 > + db_get grub-installer/no-nvram > +

Bug#789798: grub-installer: add option to _not_ install to UEFI boot order

2015-06-30 Thread Ian Campbell
On Mon, 2015-06-29 at 14:12 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: > >diff --git a/debian/grub-installer.templates > >b/debian/grub-installer.templates > >index e294afb..e5d090b 100644 > >--- a/debian/grub-installer.templates > >+++ b/debian/grub-installer.templates > >@@ -285,3 +285,15 @@ _Description: For

Bug#789798: grub-installer: add option to _not_ install to UEFI boot order

2015-06-29 Thread Steve McIntyre
tall before most tests. > >The problem is that during install Debian inserts itself into the UEFI boot >order _before_ the PXE entry, this happens via grub-installer.udeb -> >grub-install (from the main grub deb) -> efibootmgr -c. > >This means that when we come to want to

Bug#789798: grub-installer: add option to _not_ install to UEFI boot order

2015-06-24 Thread Ian Campbell
PXE grub.efi to the one on the ESP (using grub-installer/force-efi-extra-removable for simplicity, but that's by the by, I think). This is for automated testing which does a fresh install before most tests. The problem is that during install Debian inserts itself into the UEFI boot order _be