On Sun, Feb 02, 2014 at 08:09:01PM +0000, Richard Hughes wrote: > On 2 February 2014 19:57, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > /boot is (on basically every Fedora system deployed so far) not FAT, so > > if your bootloader doesn't read any other filesystems it's not going to > > be able to boot a kernel. > > Is a FAT /boot such a bad thing? Is there a good reason why gummiboot > only supports FAT and not something like ext2? /boot has traditionally been a POSIX-style filesystem that supports things like symlinks, so it's not unthinkable that changing it would break some expectations. gummiboot only supports FAT because it only uses the firmware's built-in filesystem code, and that's almost always just FAT. > > LoadImage() is problematic because Fedora > > kernels aren't signed with a key that the firmware trusts, so the > > firmware will refuse to load the kernel. > > So you have to load a new key before installing? Is this such a bad > thing? Sorry for all the newbie questions. There's no standard UI for installing new keys, and we can't hope to document every UI that does exist, so we decided to adopt a solution that doesn't require manual intervention for this. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
