https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbys...@in.waw.pl> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|needinfo?(zbys...@in.waw.pl |
|) |
--- Comment #22 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbys...@in.waw.pl> ---
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #21)
> He's saying it should not be overwriting the shim EFI binary, and I agree,
> that's Bad(tm).
The example I showed is for the unsigned binary that replaces shim.
Once the binary has been signed, we'll have to install it under a different
path where
shim can pick it up. From what we looked at, we might have to call ourselves
either 'grubx64.efi'
or 'fallbackx64.efi', because that's what shim looks for. If shim gets support
for looking for
a more generic name later, we could switch to that.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079784
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
