I also don't understand the reluctance to release 32 efi compatible media. The 64 bit media are well tested, support traditional bios hardware, efi only and efi legacy. Why would this be different for 32 bit. Leaving it with the (often non-expert) users to install it themselves with several hooks and pitfalls seems a bit weak to me from the side of ubuntu. I am a semi-experienced Linux user, but I am reluctant to do this myself.
As Dmitrijs sas "The bug here is against ubuntu-cdimage project that we don't generate any 32-bit uefi capable installation media. But i'd like to see a significant market share of 32bit-only-UEFI machines before we do introduce such an image." What do you see as a significant markershare. There is a clear problem, a clear demand from several users, a fair number of hardware affected ... I'd say that sounds significant enough. If it helps to launch a ticket to ubuntu-cdimage then we can of course do so. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1025555 Title: Ubuntu i386 images are not compatible with recent (UEFI) computers To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-cdimage/+bug/1025555/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
