On Sat, 2024-08-24 at 14:52 +0930, Tim via users wrote:
> Reminds me of the comments you get from people "but I had anti-virus
> installed" when their systems turns its toes up after they've
> deliberately ran pirated, or pirating, software. It ain't magic, but
> it tries to engender too much blin
of the most important security features on modern
hardware. It checks all the installed software to ensure it can be
trusted before the computer boots up, including UEFI firmware drivers,
EFI applications, and the installed operating system. Enabling it helps
keep you safe from malware"
Mos
On Fri, 2024-08-23 at 11:26 -0400, Neal Becker wrote:
> > I ran across this article that has some good info:
> https://www.xda-developers.com/6-bios-settings-every-new-pc-builder-needs-to-know-about
Yes, I had actually read that before asking. Anyway, it's working now.
poc
--
___
On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 6:14 AM Patrick O'Callaghan
wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-08-20 at 15:36 +0930, Tim via users wrote:
> > On Mon, 2024-08-19 at 22:02 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > The overclocking options start at 5400, so I don't think that's it.
> > > The
> > > DRAM spec is 5200 and I
On Tue, 2024-08-20 at 15:36 +0930, Tim via users wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-08-19 at 22:02 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > The overclocking options start at 5400, so I don't think that's it.
> > The
> > DRAM spec is 5200 and I now have it working at that frequency.
>
> Makes me wonder if the auto
On Mon, 2024-08-19 at 22:02 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> The overclocking options start at 5400, so I don't think that's it. The
> DRAM spec is 5200 and I now have it working at that frequency.
Makes me wonder if the automatic selection is based on some unmentioned
criteria (*lowest* common
On Mon, 2024-08-19 at 14:17 -0400, doug.lindqu...@atlanticbb.net wrote:
> I recently upgraded to an AM5 system with 128gb ddr5 memory. The
> lower 4800
> is the base frequency. The 5200 might be if you overclocked it.
The overclocking options start at 5400, so I don't think that's it. The
DRAM
I recently upgraded to an AM5 system with 128gb ddr5 memory. The lower 4800
is the base frequency. The 5200 might be if you overclocked it.
On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 07:54:46 -0500 Richard Shaw wrote:
On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 7:08 AM Patrick O'Callaghan
wrote:
On Mon, 2024-08-19 at 06:57 -05
> On 19 Aug 2024, at 13:06, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>
> Pretty much where I am too, which is why I said it was no big deal. I
> bought the mobo, cpu and RAM from scan.co.uk as a bundle, so I presume
> it's all good, but I just wanted to scratch that itch.
Raise a tech support ticket with sc
On Mon, 2024-08-19 at 14:56 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > I've just had a fiddle in my AM5 BIOS and while it's not
> > *immediately*
> > obvious, you can enable EXPO by clicking the A-XMP profile 'button'
> > until
> > it's shaded.
> >
> > cf: https://photos.app.goo.gl/GxyCkoJQeX7DJMLx9
>
On Mon, 2024-08-19 at 14:10 +0100, Will McDonald wrote:
> Your BIOS is probably set in EZ mode and as Richad said, you probably
> need
> to tweak some XMP or EXPO modes in the BIOS to get the most out of
> the
> modules.
>
> The motherboard manual is here:
> https://download.msi.com/archive/mnu_ex
zen 7600 and Corsair DDR5 RAM. The RAM specs show a
> > recommended frequency of 5200 MHz, but the UEFI screen shows it
> > running
> > at 4800MHz (even though it also notes the correct spec). Here's a
> > screenshot link:
> >
> > https://drive.google.com/file
On Mon, 2024-08-19 at 07:54 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 7:08 AM Patrick O'Callaghan
>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2024-08-19 at 06:57 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > > With the caveat that I haven't built an AM5 system yet, can you
> > > find
> > > any
> > > settings for AMP?
nstalled a new system based on an MSI B650-P motherboard
> with an AMD Ryzen 7600 and Corsair DDR5 RAM. The RAM specs show a
> recommended frequency of 5200 MHz, but the UEFI screen shows it running
> at 4800MHz (even though it also notes the correct spec). Here's
On 19/8/24 9:17 pm, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
Apologies in advance if this is too OT.
I recently installed a new system based on an MSI B650-P motherboard
with an AMD Ryzen 7600 and Corsair DDR5 RAM. The RAM specs show a
recommended frequency of 5200 MHz, but the UEFI screen shows it ru
On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 7:08 AM Patrick O'Callaghan
wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-08-19 at 06:57 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > With the caveat that I haven't built an AM5 system yet, can you find
> > any
> > settings for AMP? I think this is the AMD equivalent of XMP.
> >
>
> It appears to be using an
On Mon, 2024-08-19 at 06:57 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> With the caveat that I haven't built an AM5 system yet, can you find
> any
> settings for AMP? I think this is the AMD equivalent of XMP.
>
It appears to be using an A-XMP profile (according to the screenshot I
posted). I just wonder why i
On Mon, 2024-08-19 at 07:49 -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> The server also used DDR5 RAM, I only know it because I used
> pcpartpicker.com to prepare the list of components I needed to buy,
> and the
> line item for the RAM modules said "DDR5". I have no idea what
> actual
> frequency they r
On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 6:18 AM Patrick O'Callaghan
wrote:
> Apologies in advance if this is too OT.
>
> I recently installed a new system based on an MSI B650-P motherboard
> with an AMD Ryzen 7600 and Corsair DDR5 RAM. The RAM specs show a
> recommended frequency of 52
Patrick O'Callaghan writes:
Apologies in advance if this is too OT.
I recently installed a new system based on an MSI B650-P motherboard
with an AMD Ryzen 7600 and Corsair DDR5 RAM. The RAM specs show a
recommended frequency of 5200 MHz, but the UEFI screen shows it running
at 4800MHz
Apologies in advance if this is too OT.
I recently installed a new system based on an MSI B650-P motherboard
with an AMD Ryzen 7600 and Corsair DDR5 RAM. The RAM specs show a
recommended frequency of 5200 MHz, but the UEFI screen shows it running
at 4800MHz (even though it also notes the correct
pgrading to F40. I
now run a brand new F40 on a brand new SSD :=)
It is still a pity that the live media do not boot as UEFI. This would
prevent people to trial Fedora.
Thanks
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send
On 6/29/24 10:01 AM, Frédéric wrote:
I created a USB stick with a live version of Fedora 40. I tried both
the default version and the KDE Spin. I tried using dd and using
mediawriter. Same result: I cannot boot on the USB drive if my BIOS is
configured in UEFI as it is to boot from my hard disk
On Sun, Jun 30, 2024 at 12:49 PM Frédéric wrote:
> [...]
> So I'm still not able to boot F40 on a USB stick.
>
> Maybe, I should try F39 or F38. If it works, I will be able to upgrade
> later.
Some people have been able to boot either the network installer or the
server
installer. For the latt
> On 30 Jun 2024, at 16:30, Frédéric wrote:
>
> However, I was
> able to download and install F36 on a USB stick and boot from it
> without any issue.
Are you using windows to create the usb stick?
Was the f36 image a lot smaller then all the newer versions?
Barry
--
_
> I created a USB stick with a live version of Fedora 40. I tried both
> the default version and the KDE Spin. I tried using dd and using
> mediawriter. Same result: I cannot boot on the USB drive if my BIOS is
> configured in UEFI as it is to boot from my hard disk on Fedora 38. It
ot;. However, this does not make my USB stick bootable as
UEFI.
I tried another one (Kingston, 32 Gb). Here again, I needed to fix the
GPT alternate header with fdisk but I still cannot boot as UEFI with
it.
Note that in the partition manager, I see a different partition
structure between the F30
On Sat, Jun 29, 2024 at 1:02 PM Frédéric wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I created a USB stick with a live version of Fedora 40. I tried both
> the default version and the KDE Spin. I tried using dd and using
> mediawriter. Same result: I cannot boot on the USB drive if my BIOS is
> con
Hi,
I created a USB stick with a live version of Fedora 40. I tried both
the default version and the KDE Spin. I tried using dd and using
mediawriter. Same result: I cannot boot on the USB drive if my BIOS is
configured in UEFI as it is to boot from my hard disk on Fedora 38. It
says that there
> Added a Fedora 37 and Fedora 38 installations on separate drives to a
> Windows system. Default boot is the Windows 10 system. Using the boot
> menu gets me to grub which can boot the system of my choice.
>
> When the Fedora 38 install goes to sleep it doesn't come back to Fedora
> but boots
> Added a Fedora 37 and Fedora 38 installations on separate drives to a
> Windows system. Default boot is the Windows 10 system. Using the boot
> menu gets me to grub which can boot the system of my choice.
>
> When the Fedora 38 install goes to sleep it doesn't come back to Fedora
> but boots
On 8/23/23 19:43, Tim via users wrote:
On Wed, 2023-08-23 at 15:27 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
It only worked when Windows was an option from the GRUB menu. That is
not done on UEFI systems because of secure boot.
If Windows can set a flag in UEFI to tell it what to boot up from next,
can&#
On Wed, 2023-08-23 at 15:27 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> It only worked when Windows was an option from the GRUB menu. That is
> not done on UEFI systems because of secure boot.
If Windows can set a flag in UEFI to tell it what to boot up from next,
can't Fedora do the same trick?
ows.
This stopped working when the BLS change was made.
It only worked when Windows was an option from the GRUB menu. That is
not done on UEFI systems because of secure boot.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe sen
> On 22 Aug 2023, at 08:14, Tim via users wrote:
>
> (b) Use the "save default" GRUB options so that GRUB records which
> option you chose to boot from
This only works to pick between fedora version these days.
It will not remember you last booted to windows.
This stopped working when the BLS
On 8/22/23 09:46, stan via users wrote:
On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 08:11:02 -0400
Robert McBroom via users wrote:
looked in system settings, screensaver settings, powermanager
settings and did not find the magic button. Using LXDE.
I had this happen to me at one point because the XFCE screensaver
s
On Wed, 2023-08-23 at 10:15 +0930, Tim via users wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-08-22 at 17:15 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > AFAIK this is at least partly controlled by GDM, so using a
> > different
> > login manager such as SDDM is likely to fix it without having to
> > edit
> > anything. I use SDD
On Tue, 2023-08-22 at 17:15 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> AFAIK this is at least partly controlled by GDM, so using a different
> login manager such as SDDM is likely to fix it without having to edit
> anything. I use SDDM and have never had to put up with this.
Wondering... Does having GDM
On Tue, 2023-08-22 at 06:46 -0700, stan via users wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 08:11:02 -0400
> Robert McBroom via users wrote:
>
> > looked in system settings, screensaver settings, powermanager
> > settings and did not find the magic button. Using LXDE.
>
> I had this happen to me at one point
On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 08:11:02 -0400
Robert McBroom via users wrote:
> looked in system settings, screensaver settings, powermanager
> settings and did not find the magic button. Using LXDE.
I had this happen to me at one point because the XFCE screensaver
started automatically, even if XFCE wasn'
On 8/22/23 01:04, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/21/23 21:06, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
Added a Fedora 37 and Fedora 38 installations on separate drives to a
Windows system. Default boot is the Windows 10 system. Using the boot
menu gets me to grub which can boot the system of my choice.
When
On Tue, 2023-08-22 at 00:06 -0400, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
> Added a Fedora 37 and Fedora 38 installations on separate drives to a
> Windows system. Default boot is the Windows 10 system. Using the boot
> menu gets me to grub which can boot the system of my choice.
> When the Fedora 38 ins
On 8/21/23 21:06, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
Added a Fedora 37 and Fedora 38 installations on separate drives to a
Windows system. Default boot is the Windows 10 system. Using the boot
menu gets me to grub which can boot the system of my choice.
When the Fedora 38 install goes to sleep it
Added a Fedora 37 and Fedora 38 installations on separate drives to a
Windows system. Default boot is the Windows 10 system. Using the boot
menu gets me to grub which can boot the system of my choice.
When the Fedora 38 install goes to sleep it doesn't come back to Fedora
but boots to the Wind
On 6/4/23 17:30, Chris Adams wrote:
Again, the DHCP request that gets a response "use this file" comes from
the firmware, not the OS.
It goes something like:
- BIOS/UEFI configured for network boot sends DHCP request
- DHCP server says "use this file (aka shim)"
- BIOS/UEFI
On 6/4/23 17:12, Samuel Sieb wrote:
The part you're missing is that it isn't the OS that's sending the
DHCP request. It's the BIOS. There's no OS loaded yet, that's what
you're trying to boot.
The hardware definitely sends a DHCP request when it tries to PXE boot.
But when the OS actually lo
Once upon a time, Thomas Cameron said:
> I really wish that there was something in the OS that would identify
> itself when it sends a DHCP broadcast.
Again, the DHCP request that gets a response "use this file" comes from
the firmware, not the OS.
It goes something li
On 6/4/23 15:00, Thomas Cameron wrote:
I really wish that there was something in the OS that would identify
itself when it sends a DHCP broadcast. I've read up
The part you're missing is that it isn't the OS that's sending the DHCP
request. It's the BIOS. There's no OS loaded yet, that's wh
On 6/4/23 16:25, Barry wrote:
I have always seen this done by having tooling that read a database of hardware
mac addresses mapped to config.
With that setup you “just” edit the database to switch the os you want and
rebuild
your dhcpd/tftpd config.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of my syste
> On 4 Jun 2023, at 19:43, Thomas Cameron
> wrote:
>
> Or am I going about this the wrong way?
I have always seen this done by having tooling that read a database of hardware
mac addresses mapped to config.
With that setup you “just” edit the database to switch the os you want and
rebuild
Once upon a time, Joe Zeff said:
> On 06/04/2023 01:40 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> >It'd be nice if there was a way to chainload one shim from another
>
> If memory serves, you could have GRUB boot Windows by giving it the
> command chainload +X, where X represented the number of sectors to
> load.
On 06/04/2023 01:40 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
It'd be nice if there was a way to chainload one shim from another
If memory serves, you could have GRUB boot Windows by giving it the
command chainload +X, where X represented the number of sectors to load.
I've no idea if GRUB2 still does this, b
e serve up
one shim/config via TFTP and a different one via HTTP, so you could
choose UEFI PXE for one OS and UEFI HTTP for the other. It would
probably be confusing after the fact though.
--
Chris Adams
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.f
On 6/4/23 14:40, Chris Adams wrote:
As far as I can tell, you cannot configure network boot for different
OSes in a UEFI Secure Boot environment. The shim is loaded first,
before you get to the point of choosing which kernel to boot, and a
given distribution's shim will only load other
Once upon a time, Thomas Cameron said:
> Is it that the shim.efi file is signed for UEFI environments, and
> the RHEL kernel is expecting the signature for the RHEL shim.efi
> file? If so, how do I specify which shim.efi file I want to use
> based on the kernel? I would assume I'
I am trying to kickstart multiple versions of Linux. Some of my systems
are BIOS based, and some are UEFI based.
I have a stanza in my dhcpd.conf file that looks like this:
class "pxeclients" {
match if substring (option vendor-class-identifier, 0, 9) =
On 4/8/23 20:29, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
On Sat, 2023-04-08 at 20:03 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
It looks like there is a new version of the UEFI boot system, which
can't be installed because of signature issues. Is this correct? Is
Now that I read back again, I see you misunderstood it.
On Sat, 2023-04-08 at 20:03 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> > > > It looks like there is a new version of the UEFI boot system,
> > > > which
> > > > can't be installed because of signature issues. Is this correct?
> > > > Is
> > >
On 4/8/23 19:09, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
On Sat, 2023-04-08 at 21:32 -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
On Sat, Apr 8, 2023 at 9:08 PM Jonathan Ryshpan <mailto:jonr...@pacbell.net>> wrote:
Discover, which I use for upgrades, reports problems with UEFI. There
is an update, which Discover r
On Sat, 2023-04-08 at 21:32 -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2023 at 9:08 PM Jonathan Ryshpan
> wrote:
> >
> > Discover, which I use for upgrades, reports problems with UEFI.
> > There is an update, which Discover refuses to install. Discover
> > repor
On Sat, Apr 8, 2023 at 9:08 PM Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
>
> Discover, which I use for upgrades, reports problems with UEFI. There is an
> update, which Discover refuses to install. Discover reports this message:
>
> UEFI DBX : Version 217 : Released on 4/8/23
>
> UEFI
Discover, which I use for upgrades, reports problems with UEFI. There is
an update, which Discover refuses to install. Discover reports this
message:
UEFI DBX : Version 217 : Released on 4/8/23
UEFI Secure Boot Forbidden Signature Database
Insecure versions of software from Trend
Michael D. Setzer II
>> Another issue is latest 6.01 is dated 12/30/2022, while
>> you file is dated 11/22/2019? Don't know how the tests
>> between the to options are.
Felix Miata:
> I have no RAM newer than the file, so no incentive to find newer.
That's not how it works. The program file da
dated 11/22/2019? Don't know how the tests
> between the to options are.
I have no RAM newer than the file, so no incentive to find newer.
> Will have to do some more searching. Also, your file is
> much larger than the combined two memtest programs
> and they are both le
On Sun, Jan 15, 2023 at 1:11 PM Michael D. Setzer II via users <
users@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On 15 Jan 2023 at 11:24, Felix Miata wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>From what I understand memtest86 is a commercial
> product, so it isn't something that could be included with
> Fedora directly or distr
On 15 Jan 2023 at 11:24, Felix Miata wrote:
Subject:Re: Manually get memtest 6.01 to work on
both Legacy and UEFI boot
with Fedora.
To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
From: Felix Miata
Organization: less than infinite
Date
nt to add after this comment. Be careful not to change
> # the 'exec tail' line above.
> menuentry 'Memtest Legacy' {
> echo 'Loading memtest 6.01 for BIOS BOOT SYSTEM'
> linux /memtest.leg
> }
> menuentry 'Memtest UEFI'
On 15 Jan 2023 at 0:26, Andre Robatino wrote:
Subject:Re: Manually get memtest 6.01 to work on both Legacy
and
UEFI boot
with Fedora.
From: "Andre Robatino"
To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Date sent: Sun, 1
Or maybe 2 packages, one for Legacy and one for UEFI. When Fedora eventually
drops support for Legacy the first package would go away. All my machines are
Legacy and I'd love to have it working again.
___
users mailing list --
requires different
options for booting with Legacy and UEFI.
### BEGIN /etc/grub.d/20_memtest86+ ###
menuentry 'Fedora Memtest memtest86+-5.31' {
insmod part_msdos
insmod ext2
set root='hd0,msdos5'
if [ x$feature_platform_search_hint = xy ]; then
t;> replaced by an SSD. Put in a new nvme drive that has F37 on it. Was
> >> switching back and forth between Fedora and Windows on the SSD with
> >> the bios boot. Worked for a long time but now the bios boot does
> >> not recognize the SSD as UEFI. The files in th
the SSD with
the bios boot. Worked for a long time but now the bios boot does not
recognize the SSD as UEFI. The files in the efi-usb partition look to
be unchanged.
HP is not very responsive. Anyone have a similar experience and find
a solution?
Is it possible that the bios boot list doesn't
boot. Worked for a long time but now the bios boot does not
> recognize the SSD as UEFI. The files in the efi-usb partition look to
> be unchanged.
>
> HP is not very responsive. Anyone have a similar experience and find
> a solution?
Is it possible that the bios boot list doesn
Have a dual boot system with originally a nvme drive that was replaced
by an SSD. Put in a new nvme drive that has F37 on it. Was switching
back and forth between Fedora and Windows on the SSD with the bios boot.
Worked for a long time but now the bios boot does not recognize the SSD
as UEFI
stallation media.
It's commonly used for BIOS PXE booting as well.
*shudders at the memories of dealing with pxelinux*
GRUB is way better for that. Yes, you can use GRUB for PXE and UEFI netboot too.
That's what I use for both.
Would you care to document your set-ups?
It'
o things:
>
> - bootable live image
> - data partition for common files, visible from Windows
> - should boot both on recent computer with UEFI preference
> - should boot also on older computer with legacy boot only.
The program livecd-iso-to-disk from the package livecd-iso-to-mediums
On 02/11/2021 20:56, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 20:19:10 +0100
Petr Menšík wrote:
I would be were grateful for any tips how to archieve my goal.
I backup one level and simply have a USB stick with lots of ISO images
on it and a grub that can boot an ISO image. I used instructions
f
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 20:19:10 +0100
Petr Menšík wrote:
> I would be were grateful for any tips how to archieve my goal.
I backup one level and simply have a USB stick with lots of ISO images
on it and a grub that can boot an ISO image. I used instructions
from:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php
- should boot both on recent computer with UEFI preference
- should boot also on older computer with legacy boot only.
I understand my expectations are not very low. But because the image
itself can boot on both architectures, I would hope there exist tools
able to prepare such configuration
Short update. I know have the g4l booting via UEFI with
my bz5x14.2d kernel and ramdisk.lzma.
Had to basically add 100 lines to the .config file to load
most of the framebuffer drivers and to setup the
fbconsole.. But it now boots with video output, and even
has the default linux penguins logo
the boot process. Booted from a regular g4l
usb, and found system gets ip 192.168.16.105.
Rebooted with the UEFI flash, and again tried the eject,
and it worked. Then took my notebook, and
telnet 192.168.16.105 gets me into the machine?
Looked at dmesg, but it didn't have info on video
h the efi video mode??
Thanks again. One step forward, One step back.
On 12 Sep 2021 at 0:54, Samuel Sieb wrote:
From: Samuel Sieb
Subject:Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB
Flash with Fedora 33??
To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Date se
Thanks. I've downloaded it, and will take a look.
Have contacted the GNU Grub developer, and asked.
Will see if they have an option that might work.
Thanks.
On 12 Sep 2021 at 0:54, Samuel Sieb wrote:
From: Samuel Sieb
Subject:Re: Failure in gsetting up a
On 2021-09-09 5:04 a.m., Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
Does anyone know of a process to make a UEFI USB Boot that actual works
using Fedora??
1. Format your flash drive with a GPT partition table and a FAT32 partition.
2. Extract the tarball at https://bit.ly/3npBP0r into that
it doesn't make sense for *Fedora*.
> I've looked at the Dell machine I've got, and it is a 9020,
> and it boots the regular usb just fine. Did search thru the
> setup, and did find under the advanced bios option a
> check box to allow loading additional rom to support
On 11 Sep 2021 at 0:55, Samuel Sieb wrote:
Subject:Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB
Flash with Fedora 33??
To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
From: Samuel Sieb
Date sent: Sat, 11 Sep 2021 00:55:54 -0700
Send reply to
ake a hard disk from a 3080 machine, install it in
a 3070 machine, boot from the exact same USB on the
3070, and create and image with the 3070. The exact
same USB does not show up on the 3080 as a boot option.
Yes, it is not currently an EFI Flash so would not show up
as a UEFI Flash boot option, b
https://www.dell.com/support/manuals/en-us/optiplex-308
0-desktop/optiplex3080_micro_specs/boot-menu?guid=gu
id-8fc0315f-0cbf-461a-996f-54a98f99d05a&lang=en-us
Shows only.
The options are:
UEFI Boot:
Windows Boot Manager
The bios option only talk about updating the bios
40_custom on the standard grub2.
> I've tried a few options that created a flash that is seen as
> a UEFI boot flash, but putting the iso image as some use
> or the kernel and ramdisk files in places examples show,
> it boots, and I can select but get blank screens or error
&g
So the error message is "initramfs unpacking failed: no cpio magic". I
I guess you will need to repack your initramfs to be compatible with the
Fedora kernel.
Are you aware that there are various tools included with Fedora to help
you create live boot images?
__
On 10 Sep 2021 at 16:10, Jonathan Billings wrote:
Date sent: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 16:10:50 -0400
From: Jonathan Billings
To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject:Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB
Flash with Fedora 33??
Send
is using dnf?
> The kernels have the EFI option in the .config file, so the
> kernels should be able to be loaded via the EFI process
> somehow, but so far I haven't gotten it to work. Maybe I'll
> eventual figure it out, or maybe not. Like I've said,
> Clonzilla w
On 10 Sep 2021 at 10:43, Jonathan Billings wrote:
Date sent: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 10:43:15 -0400
From: Jonathan Billings
To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject:Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB
Flash with Fedora 33??
Send
: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB
Flash with Fedora 33??
Send reply to: Community support for Fedora
users
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 03:21:48PM +1000, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
More to look at, but less hope of finding a easy/simple
solution. Just downloaded and build 3 new
ugh it was years ago before I ever
touched a UEFI system.
I think that if you are required to run some kernel provided by a
project, then they need to provide a kernel that works with the
initial ramdisk, and that includes kernel modules needed to load
network devices and storage systems.
If the
On 10 Sep 2021 at 8:23, Jonathan Billings wrote:
Date sent: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 08:23:09 -0400
From: Jonathan Billings
To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject:Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB
Flash with Fedora 33??
Send
r the info..
I build and boot upstream kernels quite often, and I do this on Fedora
systems with UEFI and Secure Boot turned off. But I typically am just
rebuilding the rawhide kernel and adding my patches to the patch
list in the spec, building the kernel and installing the package (if
it su
On 9/10/21 12:36 AM, Michael D. Setzer II wrote:
Well, tired it and get a kernel panic...
Booted a notebook that has fully updated fedora 33, and
went to the 3rd kernel on the list and used edit option.
Changed the initrd line to use the g4l ramdisk.lzma as the
initrd and it comes up with a kerne
he initrd results in
kernel panic.
On 10 Sep 2021 at 0:02, Samuel Sieb wrote:
Subject:Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB
Flash with Fedora 33??
To: Community support for Fedora users
From: Samuel Sieb
Date sent: Fri, 10 Sep 2021
On 9/9/21 11:39 PM, Michael D. Setzer II wrote:
Not sure? The Fedora Kernels are built to use Systemd
and Selinux, so not sure how they would interact with the
g4l's ramdisk.lzma file. With the G4L kernel, it includes
systemd is just an init system, the kernel doesn't have anything
specific fo
1 - 100 of 658 matches
Mail list logo
