On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 05:33:18AM +0200, Edward Bartolo wrote: > Struggling with vendors that cater mostly for MS Windows users who > don't really care about Secure Boot being disabled or not, is not the > way that leads to an available solution. Such vendors are far too > powerful to bow to the pressures of insignificant pressure groups like > 'old fashioned' Linux users who do not want to use a 'modern > distribution'. What I would do, is dedicate a small partition to hold > a distribution that can actually boot in Secure Mode and I would use > that to manage my bootloader. > > You have the choice of at least two major distributions that work > under Secure Boot. These are Ubuntu and Debian. > > This solution was what I did when GRUB 2 started to behave obstinately > refusing to install its first stage when completely stripped of an > operating system.
Except Debian doesn't support Secure Mode yet... -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Laws we want back: Poland, Dz.U. 1921 nr.30 poz.177 (also Dz.U. ⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ 1920 nr.11 poz.61): Art.2: An official, guilty of accepting a gift ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ or another material benefit, or a promise thereof, [in matters ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ relevant to duties], shall be punished by death by shooting. _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng