On Sun, Jun 07, 2026 at 06:40:37PM +0200, Daniele Benucci wrote: >Thanks for your feedback > >Il giorno dom 7 giu 2026 alle ore 17:48 Steve McIntyre ><[email protected]> ha scritto: >> Out of interest, have you tried testing either of the single-signed >> versions of the new shim binary to be 100% sure that the problem is >> the dual-signing? If you check the current shim-signed source package, >> you can find them both there: >> >> * shimx64.efi.signed.MS-2011 >> * shimx64.efi.signed.MS-2023 >> >> That would be useful to confirm... > >I just did a quick-and-dirty test with the two files from the source >package (copying the files to my /boot/efi and choosing to launch them >at boot) and I confirm both the single-signed shims are booting (The >only issue seems to be a behavior similar to #1137247 when trying to >boot Win10, but this is OT and I didn't investigate further).
Lovely, thanks for confirming - this is very useful information. >> If more such systems show up, I might try to find the time for a >> solution for systems like yours. But for now I think you might be >> stuck where you are. > >I can live with it, since I'd expect future shim releases will be >signed only with the new key, once the old one expires. Noc. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. [email protected] The two hard things in computing: * naming things * cache invalidation * off-by-one errors -- Stig Sandbeck Mathisen
