Re: [gentoo-user] a day of PAIN.

[madscientistatlarge]

I'm using a nearly 10 year old server, bought specifically so I can compile faster.  None of my machines is newer than that.  None of my machines support UEFI other than an older imac.  The server, which was inexpensive ($500) only has 48 cores, 64 as soon as I update the processors (2 generations newer and more cores!).
I love server grade hardware!  Servers lose value quickly, they are a great bargain if you don't mind the sound of a wind tunnel or have another room to put it in.  This machine was probably $20-30K new, no slouch, it was previously used for high frequency trading.  Sadly the seller does seem to have emptied their' warehouse.


Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Thursday, May 14, 2020 11:50 AM, Andrew Udvare <audvare@×××××.com> wrote:

> > On 2020-05-12, at 18:45, Alan Grimes ALONZOTG@×××××××.net wrote:
> > Why is this not a forced-on setting for any machine with UEFI enabled? I
> > can't imagine that this would be unacceptable for more than 0.001% of
> > the install base.
>
> Because not every user has UEFI and many just use the BIOS compatibility layer (CSM) if they don't care about UEFI and Secure Boot. The CSM is going to be there for a very long time.
>
> If you don't need UEFI features, then there's nothing really wrong with using CSM. I am using UEFI because I like having a signed kernel and signed boot loader (systemd-boot).
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Andrew