On Aug 16, 2014, at 6:36 AM, Michael Catanzaro <mcatanzaro@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, 2014-06-29 at 11:15 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: >> [1] Summary of Fedora bootloading bugs: >> >> BIOS, preexisting Windows: reliably has a working boot entry created. >> For other combinations all bets are off: >> >> BIOS or UEFI, preexisting Linux using LVM: boot entries not created >> because preexisting OS's LV's aren't activated by the installer, so >> os-prober/grub2-mkconfig don't find the preexisting OS. Two year old >> bug, finger pointing, no agreement on who should fix it. >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825236 >> >> 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. >> >> UEFI, preexisting Linux no-LVM: boot entry does not work. This is a >> Fedora GRUB specific bug, over a year old, was rejected for freeze >> exception so it stands to reason it would have been rejected as a >> blocker as well. >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=964828 >> >> UEFI, preexisting OS X: boot entries don't work, have never worked for >> me in 3+ years. Two 18 month old bugs. >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904668 ## Kernel panic >> might now be fixed by upstream, but upstream's solution is flaky and >> prone to breakage every time Apple makes a kernel change. Upstream >> insists on using their own bootloader rather than Apple's for unknown >> reasons. >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=893179 ## Described fix by >> adding GRUB xnu modules to grubx64.efi has not been implemented. >> Secondary problem is that there are two superfluous entries that don't >> work due to confusion resulting from Fedora's mactel-boot support >> (os-prober thinks the Fedora boot entries are an OS X installation). > > Hi, > > Am I alone in thinking we should block final on all of these? We're > delayed so much already that it seems like it might be best to take care > of these once and for all. Especially if we are going to pretend that > Fedora is a good alternative to Mac; we should not pretend that if we > cannot boot on Macs. Fedora post-install behavior on Macs: - GRUB menu appears by default - Fedora boot entries work - OS X boot entries don't work ## The two bugs above relate to this. I don't know the % of Mac users who know about the option-key @ boot chime trick to get the firmware's boot manager to appear, but that's the work around to boot OS X. If the user doesn't know this, it's a problem, but the fix is literally "push this button". Whereas the other bugs above require esoteric knowledge to fix. And actually, there are bigger Mac problems than this: wireless, bluetooth, trackpad, and overheating/MCE problems are much worse, maybe deal killers. (At least I can't use Fedora, or any linux, full time right now. It's just way too frustrating, and may even be cooking themselves. [1]) > A nonfunctional installer is a really big problem. At the worst, the > installer should be able to detect these situations in advance and warn > the user. I think the other bugs in the list need priority, resources being limited and all. We should commonbugs the Mac bugs, which have the same push this button solution. Chris Murphy [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=924570 -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
