291–300 of 460 posts
I haven't used GRUB since my first EFI system. The EFI itself is already a bootloader after all, why would you need another one, especially one as bloated as the new GRUB.
To pass kernel parameters? How would you do that without a bootloader?
relevant comments from Hector Martin over on Mastodon at https://social.treehouse.systems/@marcan/112754303893998372 > Reminder that not all platforms support or, indeed, can support kexec() sanely at all. Like ours. kexec() requires the ability to reset all peripheral state and that is impossible on Apple Silicon because firmware is loaded by earlier boot stages and cannot be re-loaded later to the reset state witho…
So the correct response to this concern is "Okay. And? Apple will just sort itself out for themselves". I mean, what else can anyone do? Nothing because "but Apple?"
It’s a pity we aren’t really there yet with boot loading. In 2024 if I install an OS it places a boot loader in my EFI System Partition but in a way that still feels only partially complete. What I want is for each OS to install its loader in a unique directory to that OS instance, not unique to the OS vendor. Multiple Debians etc will argue over who controls /debian. You also have to bless UEFI with magic NVRAM vari…
In each GRUBified OS instance, in /etc/default/grub (or on Debian and derivatives, to avoid altering the distro-shipped config file, /etc/default/grub.d/local.cfg ), set:
GRUB_DISTRIBUTOR=
This is used by grub-install.
If calling grub-install directly one can also pass --bootloader=id=
The value is set via efibootmgr's --label
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'd rather have "NMIRFS" (no more initramfs). In many cases, you don't need initramfs. I rarely use one in embedded systems.
I use them in embedded systems because they allow me to mount encrypted volumes without exposing the keys.
It's something you can do since a lot of years. I used to do so 10 years ago, when I've got the first motherboard with UEFI. But is it useful? It saves a minimal time in the boot sequence, but at what cost? The bootloader (being it grub, or something more simple as systemd-boot) is useful to me for a couple of reasons: - it allows to dual-boot with Windows easily: motherboard boot menu is often not easy to access, yo…
> - it allows to dual-boot with Windows easily: motherboard boot menu is often not easy to access, you need to perform some key combination in a short window, also modern bootloader save the last boot option such that if Windows reboots for an update Linux does not start Do people really dual boot a lot in 2024? It was a good use case when virtualization was slow but decades after the CPU started shipping with virtua…
One of the big problems is with the graphics cards, because the vendors block a driver functionality ( SR-IOV ) for consumer GPUs that would allow single GPU passthrough for VMs.
The alternative is to leave the system headless (reboot needed, and the VM need to run as root), or to use two graphics cards (wasting power, hardware resources, etc.), for which you also need to add an extra delay layer inside the VM for to re-send the graphics back to the screen, or to connect two wire inputs to the monitor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it allows to dual-boot with Windows easily: motherboard boot menu is often not easy to access, you need to perform some key combination in a short window Hardly a problem in my experience - just hold down the key while booting. And dual booting is rarely needed anyway and generally just a pita. Just always boot into your preferred OS and virtualize the other one when you really need it. > also modern bootloader sav…
> And dual booting is rarely needed anyway and generally just a pita. Just always boot into your preferred OS and virtualize the other one when you really need it. I've been dual-booting linux since the kernel 2.2.x era and being able to do it was a major driver to migrate away from windows. It is super important for onboarding of new users that can't yet get rid of windows fully - mostly because of gaming (yes proto…
Having to actually restart a PC is a pain in the ass which is why I don't dual boot.
What's the point of using this over plain EFISTUB? I use it with Arch, and whenever I want to boot to Windows, I just use the BIOS menu. I don't see what benefit a Linux-based bootloader provides.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To pass kernel parameters? How would you do that without a bootloader?
EFI can pass kernel parameters just fine, both in the default boot entries or when running the kernel from the EFI shell.