| 1 |
On Mon, 2 Mar 2015 01:41:19 -0600 |
| 2 |
Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 11:11 PM, German <gentgerman@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Out of curiosity I looked into my /boot partition and found two .efi |
| 7 |
> files. One is /boot/efi/gummiboot/gummibootx64.efi and another is |
| 8 |
> /boot/efi/boot/bootx64.efi. I remember I've created |
| 9 |
> /boot/efi/boot/bootx64.efi during install by copying kernel image file to |
| 10 |
> it and supposedly it was for efibootmng. I think gummiboot has created its |
| 11 |
> own gummibootx64.efi. Is that safe to delete */boot/bootx64.efi? Thanks |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> They are the same image; do an md5sum of both, you'll see that they have |
| 14 |
> the same checksum. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> I believe Boot/BOOTX64.EFI is the default location where the "BIOS" (or |
| 17 |
> whatever is called in UEFI systems) looks for an image to boot, |
| 18 |
> and gummiboot/gummibootx64.efi is just a copy. I'm not sure, but I would |
| 19 |
> not delete it: |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
gummiboot creates both copies of the file. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Well, no, I have created */boot/bootx64.efi manually and */gummiboot/gummibootx64.efi was created by gummiboot install. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> Regards. |
| 27 |
> -- |
| 28 |
> Canek Peláez Valdés |
| 29 |
> Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias |
| 30 |
> Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
German <gentgerman@×××××.com> |
Archives