On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 07:49:26PM +0100, Aoife Moloney via devel-announce wrote:
> * While the systemd team can support sd-boot in its present form, they > view any additional features as a no-go That's largely "a good thing(tm)" rather than a downside. Grub does way more than is really needed for modern systems. > * Although sd-boot is a light and trivial bootloader, it has not been > widely tested or fuzzed, like GRUB has been The flip side is that grub's huge feature set means testing & fuzzing is massively more important to grub, than a more tightly focused bootloader. When we say grub has been widely tested & fuzzed, is that referring to upstream, or to downstream with its > 400 extra patches ? The latter is going to invalidate upstream testing/fuzzing results to a large degree. > * Long term maintenance of more than one bootloader would result in a > lack of parity and added technical debt The lack of parity is an intentional design choice of sd-boot. No one wants to re-invent grub with feature parity. The systemd team already maintains sd-boot so that maint work is already being done, by different people than the current grub maintainers. The main additional burden from supporting sd-boot would appear to be the need for secure boot signing. > * Create the `/boot/efi/loader/entries` directory > * Create BLS entries in that directory for each UKI. Specify the path > to the UKI using the `efi` keyword, as you normally would use `linux` > for the kernel. A minimal BLS file only needs to have a title and the > path to the UKI: Amongst other benefits, one of the desirable aspects of UKIs is that they can be zero-config for bootloaders. The UKI contains the info needed to present the boot option in a menu, without extra config files on the side. This auto-detection ties into the "profiles" concept in the UKI. Since the command line is embedded in the UKI it can't easily be changed by the user. The "profiles" concept allows a UKI to embed multiple diferent command lines, and the boot loader can present the profiles as boot choices in a menu. This need for /boot/efi/loader/entries seems to suggest that grub cannot do this ? Is that right ? With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com ~~ https://hachyderm.io/@berrange :| |: https://libvirt.org ~~ https://entangle-photo.org :| |: https://pixelfed.art/berrange ~~ https://fstop138.berrange.com :| -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new
