Re: F38 proposal: Unified Kernel Support Phase 1 (System-Wide Change proposal)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 5:58 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
<zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 06:56:05PM +0100, Björn Persson wrote:
> > Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 04:31:20PM -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > > And if you chose your HW carefully you may even be able to register
> > > > your own public keys, generate and sign your own built UKIs and re-
> > > > enable SecureBoot after that... your choice!
> > >
> > > And when your hardware doesn't allow that you can still add your own
> > > keys with mokutil so shim.efi will accept your self-signed UKIs.
> >
> > I'll see when I can take the time for a research project to figure out
> > how customized UKIs can be produced, and develop a tool to do that.
> > Probably never, because I have way too much to do already.
> >
> > Apparently there is no such tool and no plan to provide one, because
> > surely that would have been mentioned under "User Experience".
>
> The tools are already there. Essentially, any tool used in koji by the official
> builds is also available to you on your machine.
>
> There are at three ways that are used: 'dracut --uefi', systemd's ukify, and a
> manual objcopy invocation. The first two are wrappers around objcopy. I'm biased
> because I wrote 'ukify', but I think that's the way to go. What dracut does is
> somewhat primitive and doesn't get the offsets right. Obviously it could be
> improved, but putting the code to generate UKIs inside of an initrd generator is
> a historical accident, and bash is not the nicest language to do offset
> calculations. Thus I hope we can standarize on ukify instead.
>
> In particular, if some functionality is missing from ukify, feel free to submit
> a PR or an issue. It's in Python, so fairly nice to modify. So far it's been
> written to take a kernel and an initrd and the stub, and produce an efi binary.
> It could be extended to start with an existing efi binary and e.g. a new initrd
> or a different commandline, but so far nobody has requested that.
>

It would definitely make sense to add some documentation about
preferred tools, since other distributions will eventually reference
our Change document to do UKIs on their own too.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!
_______________________________________________
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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux