On Sun, 2014-06-29 at 14:55 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > UEFI, preexisting Windows:, boot entry either not created for Windows or it doesn't work. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=986731 ## Year old bug. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1010704 ## This bug was rejected as an F20 blocker on the basis that the release criteria for Windows only applies to BIOS. > > This Windows one is most serious by far. I'd interpret this as a > violation of the guideline you quoted: "One aspect of storage > configuration that will be needed is support for dual-boot setups > (preserving preexisting Windows or OS X installations)." > > Adam, I see in that bug your comment: "Discussed at 2013-11-13 blocker > review meeting - > http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-blocker-review/2013-11-13/f20-final-blocker-review-1.2013-11-13-17.01.log.txt . We agreed to amend the criterion to specify it covers the BIOS case only, and consequently this bug is rejected as a blocker." > > I think this should be reconsidered. I can't figure out how to get to > setup or a boot menu on my father's new laptop; if I were foolish enough > to install Fedora on it, we'd never get back to Windows again. Given our experience of real-world UEFI deployments since that time, I do agree; at that time we were still hopeful that the EFI boot manager could be relied on as a viable multiboot mechanism, but it does seem to be becoming apparent that that is not the case, and we should be making sure grub can handle booting pre-existing UEFI Windows installs. We've got rather a lot of Fedora.next stuff on ATM, but I guess what I'd suggest at this point is to re-nominate that bug as a Beta or Final blocker for F21, with a summary of this discussion. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
