Is there not issues with filling up the NVRAM with efi entries, even if you’re deleting old ones? I’ve bricked a computer by distrohopping so many times it couldn’t write new entries.
This latest UKI work for Fedora will lead to better UEFI Secure Boot support, better supporting TPM measurements and confidential computing, and a more robust boot process.
and HOPEFULLY lead to a less jerky-flashy-switchy boot xperience, looks like a Vegas light show at present. switched to systemd-boot, but it’s only a tiny bit better, still switches modes/blanks screen like five times.
Omg yes, I hate those. I’m sitting here thinking it’s probably one of those simple things that scares people away from Linux…“Oh god, I see black text on white background. Abort, abort, ABORT!!”
yeah, if you don’t have an encrypted drive (which I’m gonna do on a laptop NEVER) on some OEMs this can look semi-seamless.
here’s what it looks like on a laptop:
OEM logo
screen goes blank, backlight off
light on, OEM logo
blank screen
decrypt password
blank screen
loading spinner with OEM logo
gdm/sddm login screen
blank screen
9a. (sddm) loading animation
9b. (sddm) jerk when fractional scaling kicks in
and finally there’s the desktop
with additional mode switching interjected and occasionally the horror that is GRUB inserts a ‘Loading blah blah’ text message; thankfully we’re getting rid of that.
My HP crapbook doesn’t have this OEM logo bullshit. Only the windows bootloader shows it, and the logo file is stored in the BGRT. So I don’t think I’m affected unless the WBM or systemd-boot have this vuln.
Mine:
<span style="color:#323232;">1. Screen turns on
</span><span style="color:#323232;">2. I pick EndeavorOS in systemd-boot
</span><span style="color:#323232;">3. It starts spitting out logs (I love this behavior)
</span><span style="color:#323232;">4. It switches modes once the backlight is loaded
</span><span style="color:#323232;">5. I log in
</span><span style="color:#323232;">6. KDE loads
</span>
I will never understand people who install Plymouth, it just adds complexity in the boot process. If your distro installs this then I understand why: so it doesn’t look like you’re “hacking the government”. If your distro doesn’t install it and you install it then you probably picked the wrong distro.
I am reminded of the ability MANY years ago to write the kernel file directly to a floppy disk, or start of a hard drive and somehow being able to boot that way.
I just can’t recall how I did it, or WHY I did it.
Back when the kernel would fit on a floppy disk. I am truly showing my age.
6 yr old grandson found a box of old floppy disks and was asking what they were. He started stacking them up making card houses and roads for his matchbox cars. Glad he got some use out of those recycled AOL floppies.
Yes, in my opinion. The configuration of grub (boot loader) is just another step to go wrong, and this will eliminate that possibility. Additionally, it will prevent stupider operating systems (cough Windows) from accidentally overwriting the boot loader during an update.
It basically means instead of relying on a bootloader (e.g. GRUB or systemd-boot) the computer boots the kernel directly. Generally there should be no change besides having to use the BIOS menu to manually select a kernel.
FWIW, a lot of the DIY distros (Arch and Gentoo being the ones on most minds) allow this already so it’s nothing new. It’s just Fedora implementing it that’s new I guess. If you’re curious, the term to search is “EFISTUB”.
I think for most people they won’t care either way.
Some people do legitimately occasionally need to poke around in GRUB before loading the kernel. Setting up certain kernel parameters or looking for something on the filesystem or something like that. For those people, booting directly into the kernel means your ability to “poke around” is now limited by how nice your motherboard’s firmware is. But even for those people, they should always at least have the option of setting up a 2-stage boot.
Add comment