On Mo, 11.04.22 02:34, Chris Murphy (lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > > 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. Too much for some, too little for others ;-) The UI it has is by default turned off and you only get it if you hold shift down or so at boot. I mean, we do need some logic how you can pick an older kernel/edit kernel cmdline for debugging/recovery/testing reasons. And that's exactly what we offer, but not much more. (And of course, you can hold W down to boot windows. But booting into windows on dual-boot systems should actually move into gdm or so, we provide all the basic building blocks to make this nice, except the UI for it is actually missing). > I'm a bit frustrated that systemd-boot isn't signed, and apparently (I > guess) shim hard codes GRUB as the next bootloader? That's mostly a political issue. (We actually have some support in sd-boot to be installed inder the "grubx64.efi" name, to work around this political mess...) Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Berlin _______________________________________________ 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
