Debian Bug report logs - #832687
support uefi

Package: open-infrastructure-system-build; Maintainer for open-infrastructure-system-build is Daniel Baumann <[email protected]>; Source for open-infrastructure-system-build is src:open-infrastructure-system-tools (PTS, buildd, popcon).

Reported by: Raphaël Hertzog <[email protected]>

Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 09:33:02 UTC

Severity: wishlist

Full log

🔗 View this message in rfc822 format

X-Loop: [email protected]
Subject: Bug#731709: grub-efi UEFI support based on debian-cd work complete (repos)
Reply-To: adrian15 <[email protected]>, [email protected]
Resent-From: adrian15 <[email protected]>
Resent-To: [email protected]
Resent-CC: Debian QA Group <[email protected]>
X-Loop: [email protected]
Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 20:36:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Resent-Sender: [email protected]
X-Debian-PR-Message: followup 731709
X-Debian-PR-Package: live-build
X-Debian-PR-Keywords: patch
X-Debian-PR-Source: live-build
Received: via spool by [email protected] id=B731709.145375402126058
          (code B ref 731709); Mon, 25 Jan 2016 20:36:01 +0000
Received: (at 731709) by bugs.debian.org; 25 Jan 2016 20:33:41 +0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
	(2014-02-07) on buxtehude.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FOURLA,FREEMAIL_FROM,HAS_BUG_NUMBER,
	MURPHY_DRUGS_REL8,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,URIBL_CNKR autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.0000 Tokens: new, 37; hammy, 150; neutral, 222; spammy,
	0. spammytokens: hammytokens:0.000-+--H*u:31.8.0, 0.000-+--H*UA:31.8.0,
	0.000-+--HX-Google-DKIM-Signature:in-reply-to,
	0.000-+--HX-Google-DKIM-Signature:references, 0.000-+--H*UA:31.0
Received: from mail-wm0-x235.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::235])
	by buxtehude.debian.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
	(Exim 4.84)
	(envelope-from <[email protected]>)
	id 1aNnpV-0006lo-AU
	for [email protected]; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 20:33:41 +0000
Received: by mail-wm0-x235.google.com with SMTP id u188so81307357wmu.1
        for <[email protected]>; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:33:40 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject
         :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=/XAcjNVkB1JfGhbJy+JShHZ3nb+FypMCVixmmrPclR8=;
        b=LKvK1cAvnR2KYpfOYPEUx0HxXK5+xPXADiTxFIFCJqMiw9dL/6F4wZOo/LE4jpnCyB
         WupcL6j3qOcaNnlJF+wrQFwMy+vv4GlR1yA9jEkU9C4WQyjlLL1JhgCocBbatXt2I7Vm
         qb+FcJvBvTJA6Eox8aSa644iKP3c2vS6kD2Vx4VdzlmngtWgNGQt0wf1v9V1yfSJE25P
         gXh7PaCf/I5lBRnYCAfmXMbNn6znIQiettPbGK43O8IhDH8FQTHYqI15uLzbRGhzQmoM
         kqGrJyzH4MkXJWnd33R52KcQMbiX3ZMGWx0VLI0zdYIIh0x9JQCGEVHaK2divugPQSJP
         MYyw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
        h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to
         :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=/XAcjNVkB1JfGhbJy+JShHZ3nb+FypMCVixmmrPclR8=;
        b=ECqk228YlmidwWwhKEm4Su3nXWtBkz76eZtgi9lSu387k8Lhw5RNdJCj0b2x+q6lS+
         UwNezLuBN/M+Fw6lclAAfvSiT/dl1ODbApd/dDBRUnnj6N1+r7JpHveKQy6OULzJuDXy
         q0NQY+swrPKPd05DK2JGd8E28MW+yUwnuQSVF62+FwdEtpRBN6mFJGXzx0TKi52YG4YQ
         yaB4ahMIgE34RvsfF7KgaFg4TucFbr4jDud2cw354ZwXYS1ecHhz+/d9x7fRHgHx9auu
         kA7Or8In6ce+xZPzVdnbl7VbkwwfSgy3n4uj+cjKOZ56mpI4T+KmW/sC3uasovce0nkd
         ZK+w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOS6JrOykA7xtDtlPYdPavmsg+OTTxEKdtYtvURBvOPfu3yD4Ig0YuOsn9veyAYqPQ==
X-Received: by 10.194.82.36 with SMTP id f4mr21329977wjy.87.1453754014349;
        Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:33:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.58] (btactic.ddns.jazztel.es. [37.14.97.101])
        by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v191sm401693wme.1.2016.01.25.12.33.32
        (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
        Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:33:33 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 21:33:31 +0100
From: adrian15 <[email protected]>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Michal Suchanek <[email protected]>
CC: Thomas Schmitt <[email protected]>, [email protected], 
 Raphaël Hertzog <[email protected]>, 
 jnq nfe <[email protected]>,
 Gaudenz Steinlin <[email protected]>, hhh orb <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <CAOMqctSbV_3SKbQ--cvAoFxwhHQckhhELmGpMW5_xkxAEY2W+Q@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <CAOMqctSProNGUNJ106QQi9rDUsFzrEpU+FCo0z9aaHpNRYoHWg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOMqctSProNGUNJ106QQi9rDUsFzrEpU+FCo0z9aaHpNRYoHWg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


El 25/01/16 a las 16:12, Michal Suchanek escribió:
> On 25 January 2016 at 03:05, adrian15 <[email protected]> wrote:
>> El 24/01/16 a las 16:51, Michal Suchanek escribió:
>
>> What you are describing here is what it's actually implemented in my patch
>> (Well, actually the first patch version because the current one enforces
>> bootloader roles).
>
> Actually, no.
>
> Nowhere in the description is any bootloader designated primary or
> secondary or first or second. On purpose.
Neither it is on my patch (initial implementation). Yes, the term 
PRIMARY_BOOTLOADER is used there for reusing old code. But using:

--bootloaders=syslinux,grub-efi

did not enforce syslinux to be in the first place or grub-efi to be in 
the second place.

That's the specific part I meant.

>
>> So what about primary and secondary terms? Or first or
>> second terms?
>
> Both are broken and confusing.
Ok...
>>
>> These terms are used in two places:
>> * Internal variables and functions to handle bootloaders
>> * Information shown to the final user
>>
>> I'm most convinced to use the first and non-first notation. So that the old
>> code that referred to LB_BOOTLOADER can just refer to: LB_FIRST_BOOTLOADER.
>
> For what piece of code we have does it make sense to reference
> LB_FIRST_BOOTLOADER when not also referencing LB_SECOND_BOOTLOADER?
> Will that be extended to LB_THIRD_BOOTLOADER once x86 grows support
> for coreboot or l-b grows support for some other platform with many
> firmware variants?
>
> If you set bootloaders like
>
> LB_BOOTLOADERS="syslinux grub-efi"
>
> then you can just do
>
> for bootloader in $LB_BOOTLOADERS ; do some $bootloader foo
Mostly what current path does but with commas instead.
>
> after you check that you have at most two bootloaders and if you have
> more than one then only the latter one ends with -efi.

This is not a good approach. You are requesting the bootloaders to end 
in "-efi". The current approach is to name them based on the Debian 
package name. These packages do not need to end in "-efi".

My use case is the following one. The final user requests:

--bootloaders=grub-efi,syslinux

so I show him:

"Warning. You are using: syslinux as a non first bootloader. This might 
work but it is not advised."

How do I know that I have to output this message?

Because I compare the internal variable:

LB_FIRST_BOOTLOADER="grub-efi"

with the bootloader name "syslinux" and I see they are not the same one.

So, as you see I need to use:

"non first bootloader" term
and
LB_FIRST_BOOTLOADER variable.

So...

1) I don't mind renaming "non first bootloader" or LB_FIRST_BOOTLOADER 
to another terminology which makes more technical sense.
2) I prefer this approach over yours (Michal) because it's the own 
bootloader which decides if it is more suited for "first bootloader" or 
not. Let's not repeat the current binary_iso design which has many 
references to the different available binary_bootloaders available.

>
> Thanks
>
> Michal
>
adrian15
-- 
Support free software. Donate to Super Grub Disk. Apoya el software 
libre. Dona a Super Grub Disk. http://www.supergrubdisk.org/donate/

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.

Debian bug tracking system administrator <[email protected]>. Last modified: Tue May 13 08:44:00 2025; Machine Name: buxtehude

Debian Bug tracking system

Debbugs is free software and licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2. The current version can be obtained from https://bugs.debian.org/debbugs-source/.

Copyright © 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson, 2005-2017 Don Armstrong, and many other contributors.