Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 23:08:21 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Rebecca Cran <rebecca@bsdio.com> Cc: "O. Hartmann" <ohartmann@walstatt.org>, Toomas Soome <tsoome@me.com>, greg@unrelenting.technology, Karl Denninger <karl@denninger.net>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HELP: UEFI/ZFS Boot failure: Ignoring Boot000A: Only one DP found Message-ID: <CANCZdfofCFrvfaChjuBEqgVt9G3KKSnfL5SzEv_CZ%2BHobqdHJg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <a1ddbe9b-642b-f3af-ce37-71c55c4a349a@bsdio.com> References: <20190821232334.433d285c@thor.intern.walstatt.dynvpn.de> <20190821195847.577a165b@thor.intern.walstatt.dynvpn.de> <48D9A1D1-5A54-4FED-8DC8-40C9A5C9BE3A@me.com> <20190821213052.25d61cb4@thor.intern.walstatt.dynvpn.de> <480F8DE0-A38F-4BCA-9F36-0D812CDB7DD8@me.com> <20190821223140.643f6c63@thor.intern.walstatt.dynvpn.de> <f376ad0a-82de-3fca-3d72-7e938e9d1acd@denninger.net> <483d59b24a636d0214555610350b8d73@unrelenting.technology> <20190822050509.64c88a51@thor.intern.walstatt.dynvpn.de> <12E83654-1104-408E-9A1E-BE79308B9A92@me.com> <20190826132150.6f748419@freyja> <a1ddbe9b-642b-f3af-ce37-71c55c4a349a@bsdio.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Aug 26, 2019, 5:32 PM Rebecca Cran <rebecca@bsdio.com> wrote: > On 8/26/19 5:22 AM, O. Hartmann wrote: > > > > > the other thing is the weird Lenovo handling of the UEFI vars. The only > way to > > boot the E540 (after(!) disabling _BEARSSL in src.conf and rebuilding > > everything) was to set the loader's name to EFI/BOOT/BOOTx64.efi. > Setting the > > variable to contain EFI/BOOT/loader.efi failed as well as setting > > EFI/FreeBSD/loader.efi. > > > I've been suggesting FreeBSD should install the loader as > \EFI\BOOT\BOOTx64.efi for a while (as long as there's not already a > different vendor's loader there), without much success. Hopefully this > finding can cause us to reconsider. > That's the first machine I've seen where you have to set the name like that... there is a larger story here and we are getting incomplete reports because it doesn't quite make sense yet... But there are enough reasons not to do that by default. For one thing, it messes up rEFInd, or can. Windows doesn't install there. At most we should prompt for older machines. We shouldn't mortgage our future to cope with a legacy we know will sunset soon... Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfofCFrvfaChjuBEqgVt9G3KKSnfL5SzEv_CZ%2BHobqdHJg>