Greg KH posted on Thu, 14 Jun 2012 21:28:10 -0700 as excerpted:

> 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?
> 
> 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.

I've been following developments and wondering a bit about this myself.

I had concluded that at least for x86/amd64, where MS is mandating a user 
controlled disable-signed-checking option, gentoo shouldn't have a 
problem.  Other than updating the handbook to accommodate UEFI, 
presumably along with the grub2 stabilization, I believe we're fine as if 
a user can't figure out how to disable that option on their (x86/amd64) 
platform, they're hardly likely to be a good match for gentoo in any case.

ARM and etc could be more problematic since MS is mandating no-unlock 
there, last I read.  I have no clue how they can get away with that anti-
trust-wise, but anyway...  But I honestly don't know enough about other 
than x86/amd64 platforms to worry about it, personally.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman