On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 08:55:55AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 6:47 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 07:12:02PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > Hey all, > > > > Hi Neal, > > > > thank you for starting the discussion. I think it'd be good to figure > > out what are the high-level options we have as a community… > > > > > Some of you might know about the recent discussion in Fedora about > > > dropping BIOS support[1][2]. While the end result for now is that > > > we're not dropping it[3], several side discussions involved enabling > > > systemd-boot as an option in Fedora in the future. > > > > > > While I *personally* am not a huge fan of systemd-boot itself > > > > You mentioned that a few times, and we (at least Lennnart and I) have > > asked for details. If there's something important missing from sd-boot, > > we would like to know. > > > > I think this is probably a distraction from this discussion, but sure > I guess I can answer: I fundamentally dislike systemd-boot because I > feel it's not a very user-friendly boot manager because of its > absolutely spartan interface. I'm much more of a fan of rEFInd[1], > which provides a feature-rich and user-friendly EFI boot manager[2]. Ah, icons and graphics ;) Yeah, we don't provide that, and I don't think there are any plans to work on this. Instead of trying to make the menu better, we can follow the example of windows: integrate the boot menu directly in the graphical environment. We already have command-line access to this: bootctl reboot-to-firmware, bootctl set-oneshot, systemctl reboot --boot-loader-entry=. With a little bit of integration users should be able to select the system / kernel to boot directly from the reboot dialogue. Rebooting from the DE has advantages: nice UI without much work, l10n, accessibility, help, integration with normal auth mechanisms (e.g. polkit auth for non-default boot entries or firmware setup), no need to fiddle with pressing keys at the exactly right time. > Essentially, the Koji build channel for secure boot is made up of three things: [snip] Thanks for the description. If the limitation that only RH folks can build the official package is true, it'd be annoying, but not such a big issue. In the recent times, I made the most builds, with Adam Williamson and Yu Watanabe also doing an occasional build, i.e. all RH employees. It is important that people can do pull requests for dist-git, but limiting the offical builds to a few people wouldn't be a big issue. (Don't get me wrong: I would prefer to keep the current state where a bunch of maintainer *and* any proven packager or relengee can build systemd, but in practice it doesn't happen much.) > For sd-boot, it'd be making sure the package is "ExclusiveArch: > %{efi}", then in %install, you'd do: > > pushd %{buildroot}%{_prefix}/lib/systemd/boot/efi > %pesign -s -i systemd-boot%{efi_arch}.efi -o systemd-boot%{efi_arch}.efi.signed > popd https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/systemd/pull-request/77 does the deed. PTAL. (Though it just conditionalized the build on %ifarch %efi, instead of limiting where the package is built. In mock this produces an additional .signed thingy that 'bootctl update' should pick up automatically.) Zbyszek