Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 11:16:12AM -0800, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> > No, in the general case the system will do that once it fails to find a >> > bootable OS on the drive. >> >> In the general case there will be a bootable OS on the drive. > > That's in no way a given. You have it backwards. The conclusion here is that having a case where a non-interactive install is possible is not a given. Therefore inflicting the entire rest of the ecosystem with requirements that only exist in the union of the requirements for non-interactive installs and installs on a machine with an existing machine does not make sense. In situations where a non-interactive install is interesting. Aka an empty boot disk it is not interesting to guard against. In situations where interaction happens is where windows may already exists and so spoofing windows is a design consideration and and a user presence test does not break the design. Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
