On 5/20/2013 4:30 AM, Sven Joachim wrote: > On 2013-05-20 10:44 +0200, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > >> On 5/20/2013 1:48 AM, Sven Joachim wrote: >>> On 2013-05-20 07:26 +0200, Stan Hoeppner wrote: >>> >>>> On 5/19/2013 11:04 PM, staticsafe wrote: >>>> >>>>> The Debian developers (and many other distros) have chosen to put their >>>>> support behind GRUB2 which allows for (please correct me, if I'm wrong) >>>>> features like UEFI support and better support for automation. >>>> >>>> It's an odd play for Debian to get behind UEFI >>> >>> It's not really Debian's choice, the world is finally giving up on the >>> BIOS and your next machine might very well not provide such an interface >>> anymore. >> >> Some big box vendors have switched or are switching to UEFI. But the >> x86 channel mobo manufacturers have not, nor have embedded platform >> vendors using MIPS and ARM. > > MIPS and ARM machines don't have a traditional BIOS either,
Yes, that was my point. You'll probably never see UEFI on these platforms. So LILO could be used basically forever. > and *all* > x86 motherboards have to support UEFI these days. You're badly misinformed. There are far more x86 mobos on the market right now without UEFI than with, which all meet the Windows 8 base requirements and will boot and run the OS just fine. http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-8/system-requirements > It is a requirement > for the Windows 8 logo, Yes, for the logo program. And this is one of the reasons Windows 8 has been to a large degree a big flop (the other is obviously the horrible interface). Read in the press how Microsoft has been blaming hardware OEMs for the failure of Windows 8 in the marketplace: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/01/24/windows_8_blame_game/ And this ramp up of Windows 8 logo certified hardware isn't limited to touchscreen notebooks. FYI, there are brand new Intel socket mobos hitting the market *with* UEFI that don't carry the Windows 8 logo. They have the Windows Vista and Windows 7 logos, but not 8. What does that say? > and Windows won't boot from GPT partitioned > disks with a traditional BIOS - people want to be able to use hard disks > bigger than 2 TiB under Windows. This is a red herring. The Windows 8 push is touch screen portable devices. The OS was not designed for desktops; they were an afterthought. Microsoft has made this perfectly clear. And it's another reason why Win8 has flopped. There are no [note|net]book computers shipping with 2TB+ 2.5" or 1.8" drives, so this is a non issue. Is anyone even making a 2TB+ 2.5" drive? Last I checked the largest on the market is 1TB. >> UEFI is little endian only and will never be usable on some embedded >> RISC processor platforms. Linux will be required to support many >> different flavors of system board firmware now and into the distant future. > > This may be so, but this thread is about the vga=ask kernel parameter > and LILO, and those are pretty much x86 specific. Well yes, but as is often case, this thread has drifted a bit, and you are responsible for some of that drift. The point here is that UEFI support is not mandatory nor required for Linux or its boot loaders, nor must it be in the future. UEFI is more political than technical. The fact that Intel created it, for a doomed processor architecture at that, then moved it to x86, and the fact that its partner in "Wintel" Microsoft adopted and pushed it, is indicative of this. >>> Debian does not support secure boot as of now, and whether secure boot >>> restricts or enhances user freedom depends on your ability to install >>> your own keys. >> >> Even if you can, the fact that you have to restricts freedom to a degree. > > You don't have to, just turn Secure Boot off if you don't like it. And if you don't need secure boot, you don't need UEFI firmware. >> I'll start worrying about this when channel vendors announce they're >> going UEFI only. I'm sure I've got a few years. > > There are already laptops which do not provide a BIOS interface anymore. No one has made the argument that there are no UEFI only systems on the market. My argument has been that UEFI isn't anywhere close to being dominant, which is what you proposed above. Microsoft has lost its clout due to competition, and is no longer single handedly able to bend hardware standards to its will. Intel as well has lost some standards clout as evidenced by AMD creating x86-64 which Intel adopted. And the rise of mobile devices has also eroded Intel's clout WRT driving standards. Last but not least, the adoption of desktop Linux en mass in Asian markets on low power x86 chips such as VIA, and home grown RISC chips such as the MIPS based Longsoon, has also eroded Intel's standards clout. So again, we're in no danger of UEFI being forced upon us any time soon. Which again means LILO will be a viable boot loader for quite some time into the future. -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
