Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
From: Arun Raghavan <ford_prefect@g.o>
Subject: Re: UEFI secure boot and Gentoo
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 10:15:28 +0530
On 15 June 2012 09:58, Greg KH <gregkh@g.o> wrote:
> So, anyone been thinking about this?  I have, and it's not pretty.
>
> Should I worry about this and how it affects Gentoo, or not worry about
> Gentoo right now and just focus on the other issues?

I think it at least makes sense to talk about it, and work out what we
can and cannot do.

I guess we're in an especially bad position since everybody builds
their own bootloader. Is there /any/ viable solution that allows
people to continue doing this short of distributing a first-stage
bootloader blob?

> Minor details like, "do we have a 'company' that can pay Microsoft to
> sign our bootloader?" is one aspect from the non-technical side that I've
> been wondering about.

Sounds like something the Gentoo Foundation could do.
-- 
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)


Replies:
Re: UEFI secure boot and Gentoo
-- Ben de Groot
Re: UEFI secure boot and Gentoo
-- Duncan
Re: UEFI secure boot and Gentoo
-- Greg KH
References:
UEFI secure boot and Gentoo
-- Greg KH
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
UEFI secure boot and Gentoo
Next by thread:
Re: UEFI secure boot and Gentoo
Previous by date:
UEFI secure boot and Gentoo
Next by date:
Re: UEFI secure boot and Gentoo


Updated Jun 23, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.