** Changed in: ubiquity (Ubuntu)
Status: Invalid => Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/102
Title:
Ubuntu i386 images are not compatible with recent (UEFI) computers
I have heard that for EFI systems "shim" is used. "Chroot"-ing and
installing shim should fix it.
I also have a solution for the GPT situation. Creating a new image for
"32-bit EFI systems" could fix the problem (separating BIOS images from
UEFI images).
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu)
Statu
@vorlon
but ubuntu community could build a usb only d-i image to support booting those
targets. As for example http://www.minnowboard.org/ does fall into this
category of devices as well.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubunt
http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/26734.html for further explanation of the
problems with trying to support 32-bit UEFI.
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Invalid
** Changed in: ubuntu-cdimage
Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu)
Status: Opinion => Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/102
Title:
Ubuntu i386 images are not compatible with recent (UEFI) computers
To
If UEFI boot on a 32bit processor is not easily possible with linux I
will be stuck with windows 8.
More Info:
Laptop: HP Envy x2
Desired Scenario: Dual booting ubuntu with windows 8
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
htt
I have asus vivotab and seems like the only linux dist that support 32
bit of UEFI implementation is Debian EFI test CD.
i found a guide here: http://it-stuff-i-needed.blogspot.com/2013/05/my-
progress-on-installing-ubuntulinux.html
but i am unable to load the kernel thus having only the grub sel
I am a bit annoyed with Ubuntu. I had hoped that going to Ubuntu 13
32bit EFI support would be provided but ... Why it such a big deal
to provide a 32bit EFI iso?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchp
I have a legitimate issue with this as well.
I just bought a Dell Latitude 10 with the intended purpose of trying out
ubuntu's more touch friendly features on my new atom 32bit processor.
As all dells now come with EFI instead of BIOS i'm suck until the 32bit
Grub is adapted to support EFI.
I ca
This bug is related to
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/1173527
'Make the Ubuntu and flavours i386 (32-bit) version check for UEFI, and
if found, bail out and advice to download and install the 64-bit
version.'
--
You received this bug notification because you are a membe
This fork will be modified for only loading linux and chainloader
kernels, and only in UEFI mode. Remember:C language was crippled from B.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/102
Title:
We need a fork for this, grub2/i386-efi by default creates invalid
entries.
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu)
Status: Invalid => Opinion
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/102
Title
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 06:55:14PM -, Phillip Susi wrote:
> How so? The BIOS doesn't even look at the partition table when it's on
> a cd, and seeing an unknown partition type on a HD has never concerned
> the bios either.
In fact, it's not actually the USB boot that's the problem, but CD boo
How so? The BIOS doesn't even look at the partition table when it's on
a cd, and seeing an unknown partition type on a HD has never concerned
the bios either.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 02:29:10PM -, Phillip Susi wrote:
> On a hard disk the EFI system partition is a separate partition, but I
> did not think this was the case on removable media. I thought for CDs
> you just got an /EFI directory within the normal iso9660 filesystem.
> I thought the the
On 18 April 2013 15:29, Phillip Susi wrote:
> On a hard disk the EFI system partition is a separate partition, but I
> did not think this was the case on removable media. I thought for CDs
> you just got an /EFI directory within the normal iso9660 filesystem.
>
> I thought the the partition table
On a hard disk the EFI system partition is a separate partition, but I
did not think this was the case on removable media. I thought for CDs
you just got an /EFI directory within the normal iso9660 filesystem.
I thought the the partition table is part of the new hybrid cd stuff and
is only used w
On 18 April 2013 08:43, FredL <1025...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote:
> I also don't understand the reluctance to release 32 efi compatible
> media. The 64 bit media are well tested, support traditional bios
> hardware, efi only and efi legacy. Why would this be different for 32
> bit. Leaving it with
On 18 April 2013 00:15, Phillip Susi wrote:
> Why would a bios only 32 bit machine fail to boot simply because there
> happens to be a directory named "efi" on the cd image with some files in
> it? It shouldn't know or care that the disc is efi bootable.
>
Well there is also GPT partition table
PS . btw. ubuntu runs perfectly fine (though a bit slow) through the
emulator under windows 8 on my ACER W510. So I think there is no problem
with Ubuntu itself and these machines. It's indeed only the installation
support which is not up to par.
--
You received this bug notification because you
I also don't understand the reluctance to release 32 efi compatible
media. The 64 bit media are well tested, support traditional bios
hardware, efi only and efi legacy. Why would this be different for 32
bit. Leaving it with the (often non-expert) users to install it
themselves with several hooks a
Why would a bios only 32 bit machine fail to boot simply because there
happens to be a directory named "efi" on the cd image with some files in
it? It shouldn't know or care that the disc is efi bootable.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is sub
** Description changed:
64bits EFI computer (with GPT disk) with pre-installed 64bits Windows7.
AND 32bits EFI computer without legacy boot support
1) Installing Ubuntu 12.04 64bit creates a valid /efi/ubuntu/grubx64.efi
entry. At reboot, the GRUB menu appears and allows to boot Ubuntu.
** Description changed:
64bits EFI computer (with GPT disk) with pre-installed 64bits Windows7.
AND 32bits EFI computer without legacy boot support
1) Installing Ubuntu 12.04 64bit creates a valid /efi/ubuntu/grubx64.efi
entry. At reboot, the GRUB menu appears and allows to boot Ubuntu.
24 matches
Mail list logo
