+1 I perform a lot of GNU+Linux installs each month, and 99% of them are absolutely wiping SecureBoot & UEFI.
El 22/10/17 a les 19:06, Steve Litt ha escrit: > Hi all, > > I basically said UEFI is junk and Secure Boot is an anti-small-distro > monopolistic practice. These were, and continue to be, my opinions, but > they're just one man's opinion. I can see use cases where Secure Boot > would be great, and I can see cases where something like UEFI would be > handy: But they're neither necessary nor wanted on MY computers. > > If I had a real choice to stick with MBR and always be able to disable > Secure Boot, the world would be fine. We'd all make our choice, and > we'd all be happy. > > But you don't know if you can turn off Secure Boot until you've bought > the mobo or computer. This ability, which is the #1 priority for me, > doesn't even make it to the specifications. There's no way to find out. > THAT's why I hate Secure Boot. > > Similar for UEFI. I don't like its architecture, for exactly the same > reason I don't like KDE and I don't like systemd: Monolithic > entanglement. Hey, my preference is to have modules communicate on a > need to know basis. Others may differ: All I wish is that we all had > our choice. > > So I've written this email just to make sure my position is never > interpreted as "nobody needs hardware protection against malware" or > "nobody needs a system to prevent various boot code from clobbering > each other." All I'm saying is it should be an option, and the > existence of the option. > > SteveT > > Steve Litt > October 2017 featured book: Rapid Learning for the 21st Century > http://www.troubleshooters.com/rl21 > _______________________________________________ > Dng mailing list > Dng@lists.dyne.org > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng > _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
