| 1 |
* Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com> [141219 11:13]: |
| 2 |
> On Friday 19 Dec 2014 15:46:43 Todd Goodman wrote: |
| 3 |
> > * Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com> [141219 10:22]: |
| 4 |
> > [SNIP] |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > > I am trying to find out what is considered good practice as far as |
| 7 |
> > > UEFI/MBR and boot management goes. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > FWIW, I've built recent machines with UEFI/GPT but I mostly build recent |
| 10 |
> > machines using BIOS-mode/GPT or MBR. It usually depends on how well the |
| 11 |
> > mobo I'm using works with either. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > Some of the mobos I've used have some seriously crummy UEFI |
| 14 |
> > implementations that look like they installed Windows and that worked so |
| 15 |
> > didn't bother testing any further. |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > I don't dual-boot windows so BIOS/GPT works OK (I believe windows still |
| 18 |
> > assumes UEFI == GPT and BIOS == MBR but I don't know.) |
| 19 |
> > |
| 20 |
> > Obviously I'm not using secure boot if I'm running in BIOS mode. |
| 21 |
> > |
| 22 |
> > Just my $.02, |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Thanks Todd, |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> Are you saying that there is no benefit in moving to UEFI for Linux usage, if |
| 27 |
> the MoBo can boot in conventional BIOS mode? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
I guess what I'm saying is that I've had problems with some mobos |
| 30 |
running UEFI (and also BIOS) with any non-windows OS. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
So I don't usually bother with UEFI mode anymore as I find it more |
| 33 |
hassle than it's worth for me. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Someone else may (probably) has some reasons why running UEFI is more |
| 36 |
beneficial, but I haven't noticed any. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
But these machines are not booting any other OS aside from Gentoo. If I |
| 39 |
were dual-booting Windows then I'd go UEFI/GPT for sure. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Todd |
Archives