> On 27 Aug 2019, at 08:08, Warner Losh <imp_at_bsdimp.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019, 5:32 PM Rebecca Cran <rebecca_at_bsdio.com <mailto:rebecca_at_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 > For me it is still confusing if this is path versus upper-lower capital chars. If that vendor is using suggestion from UEFI Spec 2.7A section 3.5.1.1 (page 91), then the file name should also end with .EFI. (and yes, I know, that section is talking about removable media). Therefore the question is, does lenovo accept name like EFI/FREEBSD/LOADER.EFI? Or what form is used there for windows paths? If we should or should not use EFI/BOOT path - perhaps the installer should prefer vendor path by default. But till there is confusion, there should be some notes in some documentation... rgds, toomasReceived on Tue Aug 27 2019 - 03:44:03 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:21 UTC