Fedora 44 on the Raspberry Pi 5 • Hacker News Board

Re: Fedora 44 on the Raspberry Pi 5

#41

Post by praseodym » Sun, Mar 15, 2026, 3:36 PM UTC

daymanstep wrote: post #36

praseodym wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m using an ASUS NUC 14 Essential Kit N355. It’s a bit more expensive than the Pi 5, but also more powerful (8 cores and decent GPU). There is also a more affordable N150 model. And even lower budget are the N150 mini PCs from Chinese manufacturers, but they often mess up things like cooling in a hardware revision (compared to the favorable review that you’d read). And forgot to mention this before: Intel CPUs with…

And what is the idle power draw that you're seeing on the NUC? Out of the box or did you have to mess around with BIOS and powertop?

I'm seeing 4-4.5 Watt idle. I've disabled WiFi in the BIOS (using wired Ethernet) and ran `powertop --auto-tune`, but not much else.

Re: Fedora 44 on the Raspberry Pi 5

#42

Post by my123 » Sun, Mar 15, 2026, 4:29 PM UTC

westurner wrote: post #40

my123 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that UEFI doesn't mean supporting most of those. UEFI without runtime UEFI variable writes is a thing, and that configuration is incompatible with mokutil.

FWIU, There is no SecureBoot without UEFI. UEFI without SecureBoot does have advantages over legacy BIOS with DOS MBR. > UEFI without runtime UEFI variable writes is a thing Which vendors already support this? Do any BIOS - e.g. coreboot - support disabling online writes to EFI? (with e.g. efibootmgr or efivar or /sys/firmware/efi) One of the initial use cases for SecureBoot is preventing MBR malware. What there be s…

> Which vendors already support this?

One implementation I've seen in the wild is: https://docs.nvidia.com/jetson/archives/r36.4/DeveloperGuide...

Secure Boot is still supported in that configuration, but with PK/db/dbx being part of the firmware configuration and updating them requiring a UEFI capsule update.

Re: Fedora 44 on the Raspberry Pi 5

#43

Post by sourcegrift » Mon, Mar 16, 2026, 2:49 AM UTC

samtrack2019 wrote: post #29

I replaced my custom nightmare of nixos on rpi5 (too much disk space used, too much IO used for raspberry) to a raspbian+arm+homebrew and i could not be happier

Oh no, i was going to setup the same, would you mind sharing more details? I just need a text-only linux for basic stuff. Do you share your nixos config anywhere?

Re: Fedora 44 on the Raspberry Pi 5

#44

Post by westurner » Tue, Mar 17, 2026, 5:21 AM UTC

my123 wrote: post #42

westurner wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIU, There is no SecureBoot without UEFI. UEFI without SecureBoot does have advantages over legacy BIOS with DOS MBR. > UEFI without runtime UEFI variable writes is a thing Which vendors already support this? Do any BIOS - e.g. coreboot - support disabling online writes to EFI? (with e.g. efibootmgr or efivar or /sys/firmware/efi) One of the initial use cases for SecureBoot is preventing MBR malware. What there be s…

> Which vendors already support this? One implementation I've seen in the wild is: https://docs.nvidia.com/jetson/archives/r36.4/DeveloperGuide... Secure Boot is still supported in that configuration, but with PK/db/dbx being part of the firmware configuration and updating them requiring a UEFI capsule update.

Looks like UKI include the initrd in what EFI checks the signature of.

Add signature checking for grub.cfg (instead of just the EFI shim) but that requires enrolling a local key

Add initrd signatures to grub.cfg