1 |
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 09:49:01AM +0200, Florian Philipp wrote: |
2 |
> Am 15.06.2012 09:26, schrieb Michał Górny: |
3 |
> > On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 21:56:04 -0700 Greg KH <gregkh@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
> >> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:15:28AM +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote: |
5 |
> >>> On 15 June 2012 09:58, Greg KH <gregkh@g.o> wrote: |
6 |
> >>>> So, anyone been thinking about this? I have, and it's not pretty. |
7 |
> >>>> |
8 |
> >>>> Should I worry about this and how it affects Gentoo, or not worry |
9 |
> >>>> about Gentoo right now and just focus on the other issues? |
10 |
> >>> |
11 |
> >>> I think it at least makes sense to talk about it, and work out what |
12 |
> >>> we can and cannot do. |
13 |
> >>> |
14 |
> >>> I guess we're in an especially bad position since everybody builds |
15 |
> >>> their own bootloader. Is there /any/ viable solution that allows |
16 |
> >>> people to continue doing this short of distributing a first-stage |
17 |
> >>> bootloader blob? |
18 |
> >> |
19 |
> >> Distributing a first-stage bootloader blob, that is signed by |
20 |
> >> Microsoft, or someone, seems to be the only way to easily handle this. |
21 |
> > |
22 |
> > Maybe we could get one such a blob for all distros/systems? |
23 |
> > |
24 |
> |
25 |
> I guess nothing prevents you from re-distributing Fedora's blob. |
26 |
|
27 |
Fedora's blob will not boot your unsigned-with-fedoras-key kernel, so |
28 |
redistributing it will not help anyone :( |
29 |
|
30 |
greg k-h |