On Sun, Apr 10, 2022 at 1:31 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 10:43:02AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > On Mi, 06.04.22 07:33, Neal Gompa (ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > > Irrespective of this change, I would flat-out oppose moving to > > > sd-boot. In any case, you can't use sd-boot for live media. > > > > > > If we were going to move to pure EFI boot manager, I'd rather use one > > > that has a decent user experience and not a barebones crappy one. > > > > OK, I'll bite. > > > > What are you missing in sd-boot, specifically? > > > > Also, why would a boot menu need a particularly fancy user experience? > > It's a boot manager, not a web browser. > > "barebones crappy one" is pretty strong. I'm too am interested in > hearing what is so wrong with the sd-boot experience. The problem with systemd-boot is it still has an interface. I prefer no interface for bootloaders. I'm a bit frustrated that systemd-boot isn't signed, and apparently (I guess) shim hard codes GRUB as the next bootloader? This portion of the thread maybe ought to be split out? -- Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
