Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 12:54:33 -0400 From: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> To: Glen Barber <gjb@freebsd.org> Cc: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com>, freebsd-stable stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Media image names - Document & rationalise. Message-ID: <CAPyFy2DYkYwPD_6Hm6c1wyyDjVRmSAqVnGumXYfm_k6-Jo4MTA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20141001143754.GF1275@hub.FreeBSD.org> References: <201410011358.s91DwOXJ033137@fire.js.berklix.net> <20141001143754.GF1275@hub.FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1 October 2014 10:37, Glen Barber <gjb@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 03:58:24PM +0200, Julian H. Stacey wrote: >> Maybe there was an explanation of -uefi- on a mail list. One can >> guess: for [some?] newer machines try uefi. But could we put a more >> exact purpose of uefi images in a README ? >> > > The UEFI images will be documented in the release announcement email, > because they are specific to the 10.1-RELEASE cycle. 11.0-RELEASE will > have the functionality in the default installation medium. To be clear, the existing, legacy-only images are built the same way as they always have been. The reason there are separate -uefi- images is to avoid accidental regression in legacy-only boot support. The 10.1 -uefi- images (as well as the 11.0 images) are actually dual-mode, and should boot in both UEFI and legacy configurations. I'm interested in receiving test reports of installations using the -uefi- images, in both UEFI and legacy boot configurations. (Technical detail: The image contains legacy MBR boot code, and is partitioned using the MBR scheme. One of the MBR partitions is an EFI system partition of type 0xEF. Legacy boot uses the MBR, while UEFI loads the first-stage loader /EFI/BOOT/BOOTX64.EFI. Both cases use the same root file system and boot the same kernel.)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPyFy2DYkYwPD_6Hm6c1wyyDjVRmSAqVnGumXYfm_k6-Jo4MTA>