word choices on list (Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian)
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/shite Thus, yes, it's not appropriate language here. The problem with expletives is not in the words themselves, really. Fecal matter is what it is, whatever it is called. The problem is that the metaphor inherently fails. People hear instead that the speaker is upset. And that is the message that is communicated: I'M UPSET!!! SO MUCH THAT I CAN'T SPEAK POLITELY!!! OR EVEN THINK RATIONALLY, PROBABLY!!! That makes it hard to communicate about the reasons for being upset, and also about solutions. (And when we can't communicate, the badguys tend to think they are happy because they think they win, for whatever value of the variable badguys.) In my opinion, "Secure Boot" is talking more about companies trying to secure their sources of revenue than about helping individuals trying to secure their operating systems and data, but using metaphors doesn't explain why. Talking about fecal matter doesn't talk about whether the owner of the machine controls the switch, among other things. Nor does it talk about what the community can do as a real work-around. -- Joel Rees Be careful when you look at conspiracy. Arm yourself with knowledge of yourself, as well: http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/2011/10/conspiracy-theories.html
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Sun, 24 May 2015 07:50:58 +0200, Petter Adsen wrote: > But will it become something to watch out for when buying new hardware? > Most certainly, at least for a period of time. I have a sneaking > suspicion that it might become a bigger problem for laptop users than > for desktop users, although I'm unable to back that up. For those of us > who prefer to build their own machines, I think it will be much less of > a problem. everything about compatibility having to do with laptops is *always* more of a problem than desktops. -- hendrik
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On 05/28/2015 01:41 AM, Patrick Bartek wrote: On Wed, 27 May 2015, Deb wrote: On 27/05/15 05:21 PM, deloptes wrote: Patrick Bartek wrote: Researching a laptop purchase (within the next 6 months or so) to replace my aging Desktop (1 to 8.5 years depending on which parts). Going to abandoned the Big Box forever. Need to be very portable in the next year or two. Two questions to begin: 1. Many laptops seem to only be able to turn off Secure Boot through the OS, Windows 8.x, or so I've researched. However, I've read some makes (Asus, Lenovo, Dell and HP) can do it directly through "BIOS" without needing to boot Windows? True? Any others? I recently replaced my old notebook Dell D520 for Dell E5440 ( 8GB RAM Intel i5 cpu). Everything is working great. Later models like E7*** use the DisplayLink technology for docking station and do not work with Linux at all. Secure Boot and all other options can be (de)activated/configured in the BIOS GUI. 2. How UEFI compatible is Debian Wheezy? What I'm running on the Desktop. Or is Jessie the better choice. Or something else entirely? Except Ubuntu variants (Hate it!). I don't want to run in Legacy mode for future compatibility. I won't be installing a desktop, just a window manager. Probably Openbox. I did not test UEFI, but should be supported and working. Other option I considered was HP ... I was looking for <1000€ replacement/solution, but somehow I liked Dell over HP. regards I just want to add that my Jessie 8.0 is fully UEFI-compatible and boots UEFI with zero issues. So did the netinstaller. But I don't remember whether I've ever seen Wheezy installed for UEFI boot. Figured Jessie was, just NOT Secure Boot compatible. Have read some more and Wheezy can do UEFI, too, if you use Expert mode in the installer and set up the HD with a GPT. B No, the "secure boot disabled" warning was a persistent aspect of Wheezy boots, and Jessie doesn't give that error message. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5567100d.2030...@gmx.com
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
nemomm...@gmail.com wrote: >On Wed, 27 May 2015, Deb wrote: > >> I just want to add that my Jessie 8.0 is fully UEFI-compatible and >> boots UEFI with zero issues. So did the netinstaller. But I don't >> remember whether I've ever seen Wheezy installed for UEFI boot. > >Figured Jessie was, just NOT Secure Boot compatible. Have read >some more and Wheezy can do UEFI, too, if you use Expert mode in the >installer and set up the HD with a GPT. You're over-complicating things, even. Wheezy should work just fine for UEFI following the normal installation workflow, no need for Expert mode. Jessie is better in terms of a number of bug fixes and better support in the underlying tools like grub-efi, that's all. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com "Further comment on how I feel about IBM will appear once I've worked out whether they're being malicious or incompetent. Capital letters are forecast." Matthew Garrett, http://www.livejournal.com/users/mjg59/30675.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/e1yxsdm-00020z...@mail.einval.com
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Wed, 27 May 2015, deloptes wrote: > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > > > Researching a laptop purchase (within the next 6 months or so) to > > replace my aging Desktop (1 to 8.5 years depending on which > > parts). Going to abandoned the Big Box forever. Need to be very > > portable in the next year or two. Two questions to begin: > > > > 1. Many laptops seem to only be able to turn off Secure Boot > > through the OS, Windows 8.x, or so I've researched. However, I've > > read some makes (Asus, Lenovo, Dell and HP) can do it directly > > through "BIOS" without needing to boot Windows? True? Any others? > > I recently replaced my old notebook Dell D520 for Dell E5440 ( 8GB > RAM Intel i5 cpu). > Everything is working great. Later models like E7*** use the > DisplayLink technology for docking station and do not work with Linux > at all. > > Secure Boot and all other options can be (de)activated/configured in > the BIOS GUI. > > > > > 2. How UEFI compatible is Debian Wheezy? What I'm running on the > > Desktop. Or is Jessie the better choice. Or something else > > entirely? Except Ubuntu variants (Hate it!). I don't want to run > > in Legacy mode for future compatibility. I won't be installing a > > desktop, just a window manager. Probably Openbox. > > I did not test UEFI, but should be supported and working. > > Other option I considered was HP ... I was looking for <1000€ > replacement/solution, but somehow I liked Dell over HP. Thanks for the input. I've looked at some of the Dells, but also find the Thinkpad L450 a good candidate. It certainly is less expensive than similarly confgured Dells, and has gotten good reviews. Again, thanks. B -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150527224641.6a2fa...@debian7.boseck208.net
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Wed, 27 May 2015, Deb wrote: > > > On 27/05/15 05:21 PM, deloptes wrote: > > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > >> Researching a laptop purchase (within the next 6 months or so) to > >> replace my aging Desktop (1 to 8.5 years depending on which > >> parts). Going to abandoned the Big Box forever. Need to be very > >> portable in the next year or two. Two questions to begin: > >> > >> 1. Many laptops seem to only be able to turn off Secure Boot > >> through the OS, Windows 8.x, or so I've researched. However, I've > >> read some makes (Asus, Lenovo, Dell and HP) can do it directly > >> through "BIOS" without needing to boot Windows? True? Any others? > > I recently replaced my old notebook Dell D520 for Dell E5440 ( 8GB > > RAM Intel i5 cpu). > > Everything is working great. Later models like E7*** use the > > DisplayLink technology for docking station and do not work with > > Linux at all. > > > > Secure Boot and all other options can be (de)activated/configured > > in the BIOS GUI. > > > >> 2. How UEFI compatible is Debian Wheezy? What I'm running on the > >> Desktop. Or is Jessie the better choice. Or something else > >> entirely? Except Ubuntu variants (Hate it!). I don't want to run > >> in Legacy mode for future compatibility. I won't be installing a > >> desktop, just a window manager. Probably Openbox. > > I did not test UEFI, but should be supported and working. > > > > Other option I considered was HP ... I was looking for <1000€ > > replacement/solution, but somehow I liked Dell over HP. > > > > regards > > > > > I just want to add that my Jessie 8.0 is fully UEFI-compatible and > boots UEFI with zero issues. So did the netinstaller. But I don't > remember whether I've ever seen Wheezy installed for UEFI boot. Figured Jessie was, just NOT Secure Boot compatible. Have read some more and Wheezy can do UEFI, too, if you use Expert mode in the installer and set up the HD with a GPT. B -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150527224142.0daee...@debian7.boseck208.net
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On 27/05/15 05:21 PM, deloptes wrote: Patrick Bartek wrote: Researching a laptop purchase (within the next 6 months or so) to replace my aging Desktop (1 to 8.5 years depending on which parts). Going to abandoned the Big Box forever. Need to be very portable in the next year or two. Two questions to begin: 1. Many laptops seem to only be able to turn off Secure Boot through the OS, Windows 8.x, or so I've researched. However, I've read some makes (Asus, Lenovo, Dell and HP) can do it directly through "BIOS" without needing to boot Windows? True? Any others? I recently replaced my old notebook Dell D520 for Dell E5440 ( 8GB RAM Intel i5 cpu). Everything is working great. Later models like E7*** use the DisplayLink technology for docking station and do not work with Linux at all. Secure Boot and all other options can be (de)activated/configured in the BIOS GUI. 2. How UEFI compatible is Debian Wheezy? What I'm running on the Desktop. Or is Jessie the better choice. Or something else entirely? Except Ubuntu variants (Hate it!). I don't want to run in Legacy mode for future compatibility. I won't be installing a desktop, just a window manager. Probably Openbox. I did not test UEFI, but should be supported and working. Other option I considered was HP ... I was looking for <1000€ replacement/solution, but somehow I liked Dell over HP. regards I just want to add that my Jessie 8.0 is fully UEFI-compatible and boots UEFI with zero issues. So did the netinstaller. But I don't remember whether I've ever seen Wheezy installed for UEFI boot. Deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/556645c2.5040...@gmx.com
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
Patrick Bartek wrote: > > Researching a laptop purchase (within the next 6 months or so) to replace > my aging Desktop (1 to 8.5 years depending on which parts). Going to > abandoned the Big Box forever. Need to be very portable in the next year > or two. Two questions to begin: > > 1. Many laptops seem to only be able to turn off Secure Boot through the > OS, Windows 8.x, or so I've researched. However, I've read some makes > (Asus, Lenovo, Dell and HP) can do it directly through "BIOS" without > needing to boot Windows? True? Any others? I recently replaced my old notebook Dell D520 for Dell E5440 ( 8GB RAM Intel i5 cpu). Everything is working great. Later models like E7*** use the DisplayLink technology for docking station and do not work with Linux at all. Secure Boot and all other options can be (de)activated/configured in the BIOS GUI. > > 2. How UEFI compatible is Debian Wheezy? What I'm running on the Desktop. > Or is Jessie the better choice. Or something else entirely? Except > Ubuntu variants (Hate it!). I don't want to run in Legacy mode for future > compatibility. I won't be installing a desktop, just a window manager. > Probably Openbox. I did not test UEFI, but should be supported and working. Other option I considered was HP ... I was looking for <1000€ replacement/solution, but somehow I liked Dell over HP. regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/mk5ch7$po$1...@ger.gmane.org
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 26/05/15 20:53, Lisi Reisz wrote: > I object to your language. Both the swearing and the constant > unwarranted use of the word malicious. The swearing is against the code of conduct of the list, even. https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct The messing up of company names etc I just consider juvenile - I don't complain often; my estimation of the person just drops each time I use it :-) Richard -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJVZZNCAAoJEDn+2exNOUNu9HoP/iobM/+3Drdwlx5djs34OJjU x5YweKjCO3sfXdMxJSqYzs+N4Z0cKYqa0MzIAZHJE6+D8xntgaYhdvviGmFH7oQw tRtx6tLAPwe93A3lsHpN51uaaoAnYKZFVT+qqUqfajlr4JN6pAVeJWtPxVfCHwBA 3rETIa96RS/OeWayLPA853BKICeuk9tcT3VfAk+XaZrM0JlwgVTXIqSEoD1IiSQh T8Jw/PH4Zm6ulGBmAG1zbjTUN+xbgDM1TY8OVEWYauOEWC4gAVzSY/sG8Ok8kTv9 T+ULutUtkj1zv+XuIlkD3Gr38XXJX47hnB9PAju1H0LA2bt+MFvHdxbnY6kIEpCH l9r1uAIkFPrEIEzhB03Oaa+JkDajhaqb7c05pRqw0hXJF2rXuCKicIzqUnM9+yuz LyMBE9yHhVt6aCf0eioiExXTjqBL7DCWHw1DPIJTxWW5G0SVTFwFF2HVz4aR7oCt q1XV3LCqcTwZeRnmFmLLbjoJRDigo5xpgnDvQV19aA669EBZ1moIJHKrvmqHnQ22 NLxVO3q6o1lPTtJnv6NArrtkk065PnE3BHbvZqJ6yEbX3XNEyGsV1joojEFrgycL dO81X6SErAFRNLLTk+jorrmPD2GXRhXT3NGrWInJCu+vPfmV3rlp3QvpPKCP9pL7 CsP3H4c+J8edZc3zX9t/ =LtuU -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/55659342.4060...@walnut.gen.nz
Virtual Machines <- Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On 05/26/2015 05:18 AM, Petter Adsen wrote: Second, virtual machines these days are incredibly easy to set up and use. Steve Litt posted a link to an introductory article on qemu/KVM here very recently, I suggest that as a starting point. There is a tool called "Virtual Machine Manager" (package: virt-manager) that I would recommend. It is very easy to use, and uses qemu/KVM. Virtualbox from Oracle is another alternative, though I prefer KVM. Hey, Petter, What advantages and/or disadvantages do you find between KVM and Virtualbox...? Using a VM takes a little bit of resources, but would give you the ability to run another distribution without having to reboot. You can run it full-screen, so you can use the desktop just as you normally would. For increased performance, you can set the virtual machine up to use a partition (or logical volume) just as a regular installation, instead of using an image file. After I buy myself a new laptop for this, I intend to install on it some VM system, haven't decided which yet. I'd be using it for web development (probably Drupal) and so would want to have running browsers for Linux, Windows, and MacOS running to check pages' appearance and functionality. (There are other reasons to run VMs, that's an important one though.) Any tips you might offer towards this end, including hardware recommendations, would be much appreciated. Thanks for sharing expertise. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/55649491.4050...@mousecar.com
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Tue, 26 May 2015 11:18:00 +0200 Petter Adsen wrote: > Second, virtual machines these days are incredibly easy to set up and > use. Steve Litt posted a link to an introductory article on qemu/KVM > here very recently, I suggest that as a starting point. There is a Sorry about that, the post was on another list. Anyway, the link: http://troubleshooters.com/linux/diy/qemu.htm Petter -- "I'm ionized" "Are you sure?" "I'm positive." pgpKKB1QD4Id1.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Tue, 26 May 2015 16:58:05 +0800 Bret Busby wrote: > On 26/05/2015, Petter Adsen wrote: > > On Tue, 26 May 2015 12:23:25 +0800 > > Bret Busby wrote: > > > >> On 26/05/2015, Stuart Longland wrote: > >> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > >> > Hash: SHA512 > >> > > >> > On 24/05/15 19:03, Petter Adsen wrote: > >> >> If both Wheezy and Trusty are installed in legacy mode the > >> >> bootloader should see all of them. Dependent on your needs, an > >> >> easier way might be to just spin up a VM or three with the > >> >> systems you use the least. KVM is a wonderful thing. > >> > > >> > Better yet, for some of these is LXC. I run several instances of > >> > Debian managed by libvirt on a Gentoo host, with much less > >> > overheads than you get from a VM. > >> > > >> > apt-get install virt-manager bridge-utils libvirt-bin lxc > >> > debootstrap > >> > > >> > will probably get you started. Use debootstrap to create the > >> > Debian/Ubuntu instances, creating the root filesystems in > >> > /var/lib/libvirt/images, then use virt-manager to set them up in > >> > LXC. > >> > > >> > https://wiki.debian.org/LXC > >> > - -- > >> > Stuart Longland (aka Redhatter, VK4MSL) > >> > > >> > I haven't lost my mind... > >> > ...it's backed up on a tape somewhere. > >> > >> > >> I should probably have been more explicit, in my stating of the > >> question. > >> > >> What I wanted to know, was, given that, in Legacy mode, with GRUB, > >> both Ubuntu 14.04 LTS and Debian 7, are installed on the particular > >> computer, and, I can select to boot either one of those, can I > >> simply also install Debian 6 LTS on that system, to have it > >> concurrently installed with Debian 7, and, to be able, using GRUB, > >> to select to boot into one of those operating systems (Ubuntu > >> 14.04 LTS, Debian 7, or, Debian 6 LTS), without any interference > >> from the installations of the other operating systems? > > > > Bret, I answered that above. > > > > "If both Wheezy and Trusty are installed in legacy mode the > > bootloader should see all of them." > > > > That means "yes, you can". > > > >> It has taken me about 18 months, to get Debian 7 installed and > >> running, in the state that it now can be run, and so I want to be > >> able to get Debian 6 LTS, installed and running, "with a minimum > >> of fuss". > > > > This should not be a problem, if you have available space on the > > drive. > > > > Petter > > > > Yes, you had indicated that it should work, but then, others, like > shown in the post above, apparently indicated that to install and run > Debian 6 LTS on a computer that already had Debian 7 installed, > required the use of virtiual machines, and I have no experience in the > installation, administration, and use, combination, regarding virtual > machines. > > Many years ago (about 20-25, I think), I used something with a name > like CP/CMS, or, CM/CMS (from memory), that was, I think, a multi-user > virtual machine, running on a mainframe computer that simultaneously > ran (although I did not use it) multi-user CICS/COBOL, but I have no > experience other than what I had then, as a user, relating to virtual > machines, so the suggested, apparently required, installation and > administration and use of virtual machines, in order to install and > use Debian 6LTS, on a computer that had Debian 7 already installed, > appeared too complicated for me. First off, if there is available space on the drive in your laptop (or another partition that you can delete), installing another version of Debian should be without problems. I have a couple of different distributions on my desktop, and installing a new one or installing over an already existing one has never been a problem, as long as you set them all up to use GRUB. Second, virtual machines these days are incredibly easy to set up and use. Steve Litt posted a link to an introductory article on qemu/KVM here very recently, I suggest that as a starting point. There is a tool called "Virtual Machine Manager" (package: virt-manager) that I would recommend. It is very easy to use, and uses qemu/KVM. Virtualbox from Oracle is another alternative, though I prefer KVM. Using a VM takes a little bit of resources, but would give you the ability to run another distribution without having to reboot. You can run it full-screen, so you can use the desktop just as you normally would. For increased performance, you can set the virtual machine up to use a partition (or logical volume) just as a regular installation, instead of using an image file. It is at least something to take into consideration, as you could then have as many distributions as you want and have the resources for, running simultaneously. Petter -- "I'm ionized" "Are you sure?" "I'm positive." pgpi5ZbPV3Qh7.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On 26/05/2015, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Tuesday 26 May 2015 05:15:10 Bret Busby wrote: >> On 26/05/2015, Lisi Reisz wrote: >> > On Monday 25 May 2015 20:56:58 Bret Busby wrote: >> >> On 26/05/2015, Sven Arvidsson wrote: >> >> > On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 00:59 +0800, Bret Busby wrote: >> >> >> But, in going to the company web site, I found the web site to be >> >> >> one >> >> >> of those malicious web sites, that crash web browsers (the web >> >> >> browser starts displaying the home page of the web site, and then >> >> >> crashes, while downloading the home page of the web site, and, I >> >> >> have >> >> >> tried to access that web site, a number of times, and, each time, >> >> >> it >> >> >> crashed the web browser), and so, I have no confidence in that >> >> >> company. Its software is defective, and, its web site is malicious. >> >> >> " >> >> > >> >> > Works fine here. Pretty sure that's a bug in your browser ;) >> >> >> >> The matter was explained in a response in the pertinent thread, to the >> >> message of which I posted a copy in this thread. >> >> >> >> Apparently, the crashing of the web browser, was due to some malicious >> >> flash file that Inshite had on their web site home page. >> > >> > [snip rant] >> > >> >> So, it can be a problem with the exception handling methodologies that >> >> are taught and implemented, apart from the designing of web sites that >> >> are malicious, and, the two combined, cause instability. >> > >> > I am tempted to descend to your level of vulgarity. That website works >> > perfectly in all three of the browsers I have installed, even when >> > denied >> > cookies. >> >> So, does the web site that you see, involve a flash thing? >> >> Or, have they removed it? >> >> Also, have you tried accessing the web site with the web browsers >> Arora and Rekonq? >> >> And, if so, are you running those two browsers on Debian 6 LTS, in >> their status for that version of Debian Linux? >> >> And, have you viewed the response in the thread to which I had >> referred, that indicated the lilkely cause of the particular problem? >> >> Since you seem to want to turn this into a personal affront against >> me, perhaps it would be better, if you tried to find whether other >> people had encountered the same or a similar, problem, with that web >> site, before indicating that it is all my fault. > > I object to your language. And I object to your attitude, which includes, but is not limited to, your gratuitous personal attack against me. -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .. "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what the answer means." - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of Book 1 of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A Trilogy In Four Parts", written by Douglas Adams, published by Pan Books, 1992 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cacx6j8m+ife0japqkl0kmzuzbuz3hqdpm7b21fsgzkn2xmj...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On 26/05/2015, Petter Adsen wrote: > On Tue, 26 May 2015 12:23:25 +0800 > Bret Busby wrote: > >> On 26/05/2015, Stuart Longland wrote: >> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> > Hash: SHA512 >> > >> > On 24/05/15 19:03, Petter Adsen wrote: >> >> If both Wheezy and Trusty are installed in legacy mode the >> >> bootloader should see all of them. Dependent on your needs, an >> >> easier way might be to just spin up a VM or three with the systems >> >> you use the least. KVM is a wonderful thing. >> > >> > Better yet, for some of these is LXC. I run several instances of >> > Debian managed by libvirt on a Gentoo host, with much less overheads >> > than you get from a VM. >> > >> > apt-get install virt-manager bridge-utils libvirt-bin lxc >> > debootstrap >> > >> > will probably get you started. Use debootstrap to create the >> > Debian/Ubuntu instances, creating the root filesystems in >> > /var/lib/libvirt/images, then use virt-manager to set them up in >> > LXC. >> > >> > https://wiki.debian.org/LXC >> > - -- >> > Stuart Longland (aka Redhatter, VK4MSL) >> > >> > I haven't lost my mind... >> > ...it's backed up on a tape somewhere. >> >> >> I should probably have been more explicit, in my stating of the >> question. >> >> What I wanted to know, was, given that, in Legacy mode, with GRUB, >> both Ubuntu 14.04 LTS and Debian 7, are installed on the particular >> computer, and, I can select to boot either one of those, can I simply >> also install Debian 6 LTS on that system, to have it concurrently >> installed with Debian 7, and, to be able, using GRUB, to select to >> boot into one of those operating systems (Ubuntu 14.04 LTS, Debian 7, >> or, Debian 6 LTS), without any interference from the installations of >> the other operating systems? > > Bret, I answered that above. > > "If both Wheezy and Trusty are installed in legacy mode the bootloader > should see all of them." > > That means "yes, you can". > >> It has taken me about 18 months, to get Debian 7 installed and >> running, in the state that it now can be run, and so I want to be able >> to get Debian 6 LTS, installed and running, "with a minimum of fuss". > > This should not be a problem, if you have available space on the drive. > > Petter > Yes, you had indicated that it should work, but then, others, like shown in the post above, apparently indicated that to install and run Debian 6 LTS on a computer that already had Debian 7 installed, required the use of virtiual machines, and I have no experience in the installation, administration, and use, combination, regarding virtual machines. Many years ago (about 20-25, I think), I used something with a name like CP/CMS, or, CM/CMS (from memory), that was, I think, a multi-user virtual machine, running on a mainframe computer that simultaneously ran (although I did not use it) multi-user CICS/COBOL, but I have no experience other than what I had then, as a user, relating to virtual machines, so the suggested, apparently required, installation and administration and use of virtual machines, in order to install and use Debian 6LTS, on a computer that had Debian 7 already installed, appeared too complicated for me. -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .. "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what the answer means." - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of Book 1 of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A Trilogy In Four Parts", written by Douglas Adams, published by Pan Books, 1992 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cacx6j8md9_twx+qo1e1pcxnh136t4u0+wm_ikvxhw1rmfxx...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Tuesday 26 May 2015 05:15:10 Bret Busby wrote: > On 26/05/2015, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > On Monday 25 May 2015 20:56:58 Bret Busby wrote: > >> On 26/05/2015, Sven Arvidsson wrote: > >> > On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 00:59 +0800, Bret Busby wrote: > >> >> But, in going to the company web site, I found the web site to be one > >> >> of those malicious web sites, that crash web browsers (the web > >> >> browser starts displaying the home page of the web site, and then > >> >> crashes, while downloading the home page of the web site, and, I have > >> >> tried to access that web site, a number of times, and, each time, it > >> >> crashed the web browser), and so, I have no confidence in that > >> >> company. Its software is defective, and, its web site is malicious. > >> >> " > >> > > >> > Works fine here. Pretty sure that's a bug in your browser ;) > >> > >> The matter was explained in a response in the pertinent thread, to the > >> message of which I posted a copy in this thread. > >> > >> Apparently, the crashing of the web browser, was due to some malicious > >> flash file that Inshite had on their web site home page. > > > > [snip rant] > > > >> So, it can be a problem with the exception handling methodologies that > >> are taught and implemented, apart from the designing of web sites that > >> are malicious, and, the two combined, cause instability. > > > > I am tempted to descend to your level of vulgarity. That website works > > perfectly in all three of the browsers I have installed, even when denied > > cookies. > > So, does the web site that you see, involve a flash thing? > > Or, have they removed it? > > Also, have you tried accessing the web site with the web browsers > Arora and Rekonq? > > And, if so, are you running those two browsers on Debian 6 LTS, in > their status for that version of Debian Linux? > > And, have you viewed the response in the thread to which I had > referred, that indicated the lilkely cause of the particular problem? > > Since you seem to want to turn this into a personal affront against > me, perhaps it would be better, if you tried to find whether other > people had encountered the same or a similar, problem, with that web > site, before indicating that it is all my fault. I object to your language. Both the swearing and the constant unwarranted use of the word malicious. "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor Whether or not there is indeed a corner case problem, is irrelevant to my objection. Lisi > -- > Bret Busby > Armadale > West Australia > .. > > "So once you do know what the question actually is, > you'll know what the answer means." > - Deep Thought, > Chapter 28 of Book 1 of > "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: > A Trilogy In Four Parts", > written by Douglas Adams, > published by Pan Books, 1992 > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/201505260953.42794.lisi.re...@gmail.com
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Tue, 26 May 2015 12:23:25 +0800 Bret Busby wrote: > On 26/05/2015, Stuart Longland wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA512 > > > > On 24/05/15 19:03, Petter Adsen wrote: > >> If both Wheezy and Trusty are installed in legacy mode the > >> bootloader should see all of them. Dependent on your needs, an > >> easier way might be to just spin up a VM or three with the systems > >> you use the least. KVM is a wonderful thing. > > > > Better yet, for some of these is LXC. I run several instances of > > Debian managed by libvirt on a Gentoo host, with much less overheads > > than you get from a VM. > > > > apt-get install virt-manager bridge-utils libvirt-bin lxc > > debootstrap > > > > will probably get you started. Use debootstrap to create the > > Debian/Ubuntu instances, creating the root filesystems in > > /var/lib/libvirt/images, then use virt-manager to set them up in > > LXC. > > > > https://wiki.debian.org/LXC > > - -- > > Stuart Longland (aka Redhatter, VK4MSL) > > > > I haven't lost my mind... > > ...it's backed up on a tape somewhere. > > > I should probably have been more explicit, in my stating of the > question. > > What I wanted to know, was, given that, in Legacy mode, with GRUB, > both Ubuntu 14.04 LTS and Debian 7, are installed on the particular > computer, and, I can select to boot either one of those, can I simply > also install Debian 6 LTS on that system, to have it concurrently > installed with Debian 7, and, to be able, using GRUB, to select to > boot into one of those operating systems (Ubuntu 14.04 LTS, Debian 7, > or, Debian 6 LTS), without any interference from the installations of > the other operating systems? Bret, I answered that above. "If both Wheezy and Trusty are installed in legacy mode the bootloader should see all of them." That means "yes, you can". > It has taken me about 18 months, to get Debian 7 installed and > running, in the state that it now can be run, and so I want to be able > to get Debian 6 LTS, installed and running, "with a minimum of fuss". This should not be a problem, if you have available space on the drive. Petter -- "I'm ionized" "Are you sure?" "I'm positive." pgpCTxm8Yfpk2.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On 26/05/2015, Stuart Longland wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > On 24/05/15 19:03, Petter Adsen wrote: >> If both Wheezy and Trusty are installed in legacy mode the >> bootloader should see all of them. Dependent on your needs, an >> easier way might be to just spin up a VM or three with the systems >> you use the least. KVM is a wonderful thing. > > Better yet, for some of these is LXC. I run several instances of > Debian managed by libvirt on a Gentoo host, with much less overheads > than you get from a VM. > > apt-get install virt-manager bridge-utils libvirt-bin lxc debootstrap > > will probably get you started. Use debootstrap to create the > Debian/Ubuntu instances, creating the root filesystems in > /var/lib/libvirt/images, then use virt-manager to set them up in LXC. > > https://wiki.debian.org/LXC > - -- > Stuart Longland (aka Redhatter, VK4MSL) > > I haven't lost my mind... > ...it's backed up on a tape somewhere. I should probably have been more explicit, in my stating of the question. What I wanted to know, was, given that, in Legacy mode, with GRUB, both Ubuntu 14.04 LTS and Debian 7, are installed on the particular computer, and, I can select to boot either one of those, can I simply also install Debian 6 LTS on that system, to have it concurrently installed with Debian 7, and, to be able, using GRUB, to select to boot into one of those operating systems (Ubuntu 14.04 LTS, Debian 7, or, Debian 6 LTS), without any interference from the installations of the other operating systems? It has taken me about 18 months, to get Debian 7 installed and running, in the state that it now can be run, and so I want to be able to get Debian 6 LTS, installed and running, "with a minimum of fuss". -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .. "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what the answer means." - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of Book 1 of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A Trilogy In Four Parts", written by Douglas Adams, published by Pan Books, 1992 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cacx6j8nxwmyxej4acvsnjfb1jfbqdsxvfyuluhcpwvpu72q...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On 26/05/2015, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Monday 25 May 2015 20:56:58 Bret Busby wrote: >> On 26/05/2015, Sven Arvidsson wrote: >> > On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 00:59 +0800, Bret Busby wrote: >> >> But, in going to the company web site, I found the web site to be one >> >> of those malicious web sites, that crash web browsers (the web browser >> >> starts displaying the home page of the web site, and then crashes, >> >> while downloading the home page of the web site, and, I have tried to >> >> access that web site, a number of times, and, each time, it crashed >> >> the web browser), and so, I have no confidence in that company. Its >> >> software is defective, and, its web site is malicious. >> >> " >> > >> > Works fine here. Pretty sure that's a bug in your browser ;) >> >> The matter was explained in a response in the pertinent thread, to the >> message of which I posted a copy in this thread. >> >> Apparently, the crashing of the web browser, was due to some malicious >> flash file that Inshite had on their web site home page. > [snip rant] >> So, it can be a problem with the exception handling methodologies that >> are taught and implemented, apart from the designing of web sites that >> are malicious, and, the two combined, cause instability. > > I am tempted to descend to your level of vulgarity. That website works > perfectly in all three of the browsers I have installed, even when denied > cookies. > So, does the web site that you see, involve a flash thing? Or, have they removed it? Also, have you tried accessing the web site with the web browsers Arora and Rekonq? And, if so, are you running those two browsers on Debian 6 LTS, in their status for that version of Debian Linux? And, have you viewed the response in the thread to which I had referred, that indicated the lilkely cause of the particular problem? Since you seem to want to turn this into a personal affront against me, perhaps it would be better, if you tried to find whether other people had encountered the same or a similar, problem, with that web site, before indicating that it is all my fault. -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .. "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what the answer means." - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of Book 1 of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A Trilogy In Four Parts", written by Douglas Adams, published by Pan Books, 1992 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CACX6j8N=jyroy1ntlcnon_-aahfssvkm3gvz9gwe6o9eovx...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 24/05/15 19:03, Petter Adsen wrote: > If both Wheezy and Trusty are installed in legacy mode the > bootloader should see all of them. Dependent on your needs, an > easier way might be to just spin up a VM or three with the systems > you use the least. KVM is a wonderful thing. Better yet, for some of these is LXC. I run several instances of Debian managed by libvirt on a Gentoo host, with much less overheads than you get from a VM. apt-get install virt-manager bridge-utils libvirt-bin lxc debootstrap will probably get you started. Use debootstrap to create the Debian/Ubuntu instances, creating the root filesystems in /var/lib/libvirt/images, then use virt-manager to set them up in LXC. https://wiki.debian.org/LXC - -- Stuart Longland (aka Redhatter, VK4MSL) I haven't lost my mind... ...it's backed up on a tape somewhere. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 iJ4EARMKAAYFAlVjqd4ACgkQoCQEvFhlDPmnEAH/Uv0xFzQc1Vq0bv+O6VzKN9ay 89PJi+wJpvZP5CbPAbIiT5qVQ0sbibwnngz2QHJYVWvqrYmiwiVmpOCk+xIG1AH/ bjH5lJxLH62YsBlBhRTWLe96+WlXl6h3CIOfTVeE4VwSRJF6vBxqEuEUdh8HMPos V1y8MufYObbqNTueibnSGQ== =HSwB -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5563a9e2.7070...@longlandclan.yi.org
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Monday 25 May 2015 20:56:58 Bret Busby wrote: > On 26/05/2015, Sven Arvidsson wrote: > > On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 00:59 +0800, Bret Busby wrote: > >> But, in going to the company web site, I found the web site to be one > >> of those malicious web sites, that crash web browsers (the web browser > >> starts displaying the home page of the web site, and then crashes, > >> while downloading the home page of the web site, and, I have tried to > >> access that web site, a number of times, and, each time, it crashed > >> the web browser), and so, I have no confidence in that company. Its > >> software is defective, and, its web site is malicious. > >> " > > > > Works fine here. Pretty sure that's a bug in your browser ;) > > The matter was explained in a response in the pertinent thread, to the > message of which I posted a copy in this thread. > > Apparently, the crashing of the web browser, was due to some malicious > flash file that Inshite had on their web site home page. [snip rant] > So, it can be a problem with the exception handling methodologies that > are taught and implemented, apart from the designing of web sites that > are malicious, and, the two combined, cause instability. I am tempted to descend to your level of vulgarity. That website works perfectly in all three of the browsers I have installed, even when denied cookies. Incidentally the word shite, you so pleasantly use, may perhaps be an existant, though vulgar, word (though my spell-checker doesn't know it). Microshite and Inshite, in your sense, are most definitely not. Lisi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/201505252204.19111.lisi.re...@gmail.com
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On 26/05/2015, Sven Arvidsson wrote: > On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 00:59 +0800, Bret Busby wrote: >> But, in going to the company web site, I found the web site to be one >> of those malicious web sites, that crash web browsers (the web browser >> starts displaying the home page of the web site, and then crashes, >> while downloading the home page of the web site, and, I have tried to >> access that web site, a number of times, and, each time, it crashed >> the web browser), and so, I have no confidence in that company. Its >> software is defective, and, its web site is malicious. >> " > > Works fine here. Pretty sure that's a bug in your browser ;) > The matter was explained in a response in the pertinent thread, to the message of which I posted a copy in this thread. Apparently, the crashing of the web browser, was due to some malicious flash file that Inshite had on their web site home page. Various other malicious web sites, have and cause, similar problems. Different web browsers deal with vexatious issues, differently, some involving less disruption than others. Unfortunately, as the particular web browser is ( a number of web browsers that come with Debian, are) unsupported, so problems such as crashing due to malicious web sites, are not usually fixed by the people who were responsible for the web browsers development. Unfortunately, also, different programming methodologies have different standards of dealing with problems, and I believe that the teachings of some tertiary level academic institutions, leave much to be desired, in what they teach. Some institutions that I attended, taught people to trap and contain problems, and one institution taught people to crash software upon experiencing problems - that institiution taught that the way to implemenmt exception handling, was to crash the software, when an exception occurred. So, it can be a problem with the exception handling methodologies that are taught and implemented, apart from the designing of web sites that are malicious, and, the two combined, cause instability. -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .. "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what the answer means." - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of Book 1 of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A Trilogy In Four Parts", written by Douglas Adams, published by Pan Books, 1992 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CACX6j8MQrDF=snbsOp8ibBpc7Ett8MS5nYB7nCE=nrnx1c6...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 00:59 +0800, Bret Busby wrote: > But, in going to the company web site, I found the web site to be one > of those malicious web sites, that crash web browsers (the web browser > starts displaying the home page of the web site, and then crashes, > while downloading the home page of the web site, and, I have tried to > access that web site, a number of times, and, each time, it crashed > the web browser), and so, I have no confidence in that company. Its > software is defective, and, its web site is malicious. > " Works fine here. Pretty sure that's a bug in your browser ;) -- Cheers, Sven Arvidsson http://www.whiz.se PGP Key ID 6FAB5CD5 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On 25/05/2015, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Monday 25 May 2015 08:35:40 Bret Busby wrote: >> On 25/05/2015, Patrick Bartek wrote: >> > On Sun, 24 May 2015, Paul E Condon wrote: >> >> > >> With UEFI and the forced Security Boot that is part of UEFI, with >> toxic waste Setup Utilities like Inshite, which fraudulently >> misrepresents that it implements Dual Mode, Inshite being the Setup >> Utility that comes with Acer laptops, all that is needed to be done, >> is that the boot method gets switched using the system Setup Utility, >> between UEFI to boot into Microshite Windows 8.x, and Legacy Mode to >> install and boot into a proper operating system, like Linux. > [snip] >> boot into Microshite Windows, until the people responsible for UEFI >> and its implementations, get their act together, and acknowledge that >> operating systems other than Microshite Windows, exist, and are used. > > Brett, > I understand that you are angry with Microsoft, but could oyu please post in > > English? This is, after all, the English language list. > Actually, I picked up the term "shite", from television programs from England, so, the use of the term, on this English language list, especially in the context that I use it, appears appropriate... ;) > I know that Microshite is Microsoft, but what on earth is Inshite? I don't > > _think_ you mean this: > http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=inshite > At least, it doesn't make sense. > > Lisi > In the message posted by me, in the thread "Debian 7 and UEFI/GPT", with the timestamp "13 March 2015 at 03:31" (WST; =UTC+8.00), is the following; " > Okay. > > In thinking about this further, I remembered that, due to the > malicious nature of MS Win8, it is installed with the nasty > UEFI->Secure Boot mode, which maliciously disables the installation of > any additional operating systems. > > And, I remember that the only way to amend that, to enable additional > operating systems to be installed, is to bypass the Secure Boot mode. > > So, I decided to check, using Boot-> to find the boot mode. > > That shows the Boot Mode, as "Legacy". > > So, I switched the Boot Mode to UEFI, and "Secure Boot" is shown as > "Enabled. > > So, I shifted the active position, to try to toggle the "Secure Mode" > setting, to "Disabled". > > But, the active position by passes the "Secure Boot" field, thus > indicating, to me, that, with the UEFI Boot Mode, the Secure Boot can > not be disabled, so, in UEFI, it appears to be MS Win8, or nothing. > > Now, to the right of the frame, in which those settings may be altered > (where they can be altered), is, under "Item Specific Help", > "Select boot type to Dual type, Legacy type or UEFI type" > > Down the bottom of the screen, is "F5/F6 Change values" > > But, in toggling through the Boot Mode values, using each of and > , the "Dual option is not available - not "greyed out" as being > not selectable - simply not displayed as an option. > > So, the only Boot Mode options, are "UEFI" -> "Secure Boot Mode" > "Enabled", and "Legacy. > > In booting into the UEFI Boot Mode, (after a while) MS Win8 boots. > > I can not (at this stage) do anything with it - I have forgotten the > login password (I have to find whether I can reset that, and, if so, > how). > > In then rebooting, into the Setup Utility, and selecting Legacy, > as the Boot Mode value, I get the Ubuntu GRUB menu, allowing me to > boot into either Debian or Ubuntu Linux. > > The Setup Utility displays, in the Title Bar, "InsydeH20 Setup > Utility Rev. 3.7". > > The solution, at this stage, appears to be to use the Setup, to > change between UEFI and Legacy BIOS boot modes, thence to select which > operating system, I want to boot. > > I believe that, unless and until the "InsydeH20 Setup Utility" is > upgraded, to allow the UEFI -> Secure Boot Mode to be turned off, > and/or, the Boot modes to include provision of the stated "Dual type" > Boot Mode, the solution that I have described, is the only available > solution, to allow me to boot into any one of the three installed > operating systems mentioned above. > I note that, after visiting the web page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface to which I have been referred, in another message posted in this thread, I found "while Insyde Software offers InsydeH2O, its own implementation of Tiano." which contains a link to the wikipedia web page about that company, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insyde_Software which contains a link, toward the bottom of that web page, to the web site for the company, at http://www.insydesw.com/ So I thought that it would be a good idea to go to the company web site, and find a contact email address for the company, and send them an email, stating that the software that is the "InsydeH20 Setup Utility Rev. 3.7" for the particular computer, is defective, as described above, and ask when the company intends to fix the defect, and supply the corrected software. But, in going
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Monday 25 May 2015 08:35:40 Bret Busby wrote: > On 25/05/2015, Patrick Bartek wrote: > > On Sun, 24 May 2015, Paul E Condon wrote: > > > With UEFI and the forced Security Boot that is part of UEFI, with > toxic waste Setup Utilities like Inshite, which fraudulently > misrepresents that it implements Dual Mode, Inshite being the Setup > Utility that comes with Acer laptops, all that is needed to be done, > is that the boot method gets switched using the system Setup Utility, > between UEFI to boot into Microshite Windows 8.x, and Legacy Mode to > install and boot into a proper operating system, like Linux. [snip] > boot into Microshite Windows, until the people responsible for UEFI > and its implementations, get their act together, and acknowledge that > operating systems other than Microshite Windows, exist, and are used. Brett, I understand that you are angry with Microsoft, but could oyu please post in English? This is, after all, the English language list. I know that Microshite is Microsoft, but what on earth is Inshite? I don't _think_ you mean this: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=inshite At least, it doesn't make sense. Lisi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/201505251029.26628.lisi.re...@gmail.com
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On 25/05/2015, Patrick Bartek wrote: > On Sun, 24 May 2015, Paul E Condon wrote: > > UEFI isn't the problem. Most all Linux distros support and can use > it. It's Secure Boot which requires a Microsoft key that's the > problem. If you can't turn it off, you can't install another OS. > And if you want to dual or multi-boot with Windows 8.x, and > presumably W10, a royal PIA to set up, if you can get it to work at all. I have previously posted messages about this. With UEFI and the forced Security Boot that is part of UEFI, with toxic waste Setup Utilities like Inshite, which fraudulently misrepresents that it implements Dual Mode, Inshite being the Setup Utility that comes with Acer laptops, all that is needed to be done, is that the boot method gets switched using the system Setup Utility, between UEFI to boot into Microshite Windows 8.x, and Legacy Mode to install and boot into a proper operating system, like Linux. Having UEFI and the forced Security Boot (I wonder that the European and USA regulatory authorities have not acted to stop the monopolistic trade practice - maybe they are getting bored with trying to make Microshite do the right thing), it is a fairly simple procedure, to switch between booting into Microshite Windows 8.x and real operating systems. Users simply need to turn of UEFI, and switch on Legacy Mode, to boot into Linux, and switch on UEFI (should it be renamed UE-FU (?) ), to boot into Microshite Windows, until the people responsible for UEFI and its implementations, get their act together, and acknowledge that operating systems other than Microshite Windows, exist, and are used. -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .. "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what the answer means." - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of Book 1 of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A Trilogy In Four Parts", written by Douglas Adams, published by Pan Books, 1992 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CACX6j8N7RgVerB4_1N2Y_jBwy8RLZgXhdoZ7f+xgNLctps59=g...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Sun, 24 May 2015 20:31:40 -0700 Patrick Bartek wrote: > On Sun, 24 May 2015, Paul E Condon wrote: > > > > [BIG snip] > > Two comments: > > > > 1) I saw a few days ago, an NewEgg.com advert. for a specialized > > HD/SSD combo. from Western Digital. It is a drop-in replacement for > > a SATA HD that combines in the same SATA physical outline, a 120GB > > SSD and a 1TB backing store on HD. This for just over $100 on > > Memorial Day sale. They must have figured out how to deal with > > UEFI. If they can figure it out, surely open/libre people can copy > > the WD approach. > > I've seen similar hybrid drives on laptops as the default drives. > Don't know how they are configured, but I'm assuming that the SSD > holds the OS and apps for fast response times, and the spinning drive > holds all data and/or backup and recovery partitions. Sort of. From what I understand, the SSD is a sort of cache for the spinning drive. You only "see" the spinning drive, but things that are frequently accessed go through the SSD. There is software that sets up something similar for Linux, but I can't remember what it's called - I'm using my SSDs as / and /home, and that gives me performance where and when I want it. > > 2) Who among us would be willing to download and install software > > from the NSA that says it will protect you from Microsoft? Who > > doubts that NSA has the technology to break Microsoft's UEFI? > > A lot of people already use NSA software: SELinux. I'm not one. For > servers, it's great for security; but for a user system, it's a waste > of CPU cycles. I always turned it off when I ran Fedora. It was > impossible to uninstall or seemed so. > > UEFI isn't the problem. Most all Linux distros support and can use > it. It's Secure Boot which requires a Microsoft key that's the > problem. If you can't turn it off, you can't install another OS. For now. As mentioned earlier, there are approaches underway to solve this. See my other mail on this. Petter -- "I'm ionized" "Are you sure?" "I'm positive." pgpKXicmBvJPX.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Sun, 24 May 2015 17:39:08 -0700 Patrick Bartek wrote: > On Sun, 24 May 2015, Petter Adsen wrote: > > > On Sat, 23 May 2015 12:46:10 -0700 > > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 23 May 2015, Petter Adsen wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat, 23 May 2015 09:04:55 -0700 > > > > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > > > I've read about that, but right now until W10 in its final > > > > > form is release, nobody really knows for sure. > > > > > > > > Well, yes and no. We *do* know that the status has changed from > > > > "mandatory" to "optional", but whether hardware manufacturers > > > > will actually remove the ability to turn Secure Boot off > > > > remains to be seen. > > > > > > Yes. I read that. Wonder what Microsoft has up its sleeve? > > > > If I were to guess, this is in preparation for at some point in the > > future requiring Secure Boot to be used, without the ability to turn > > it off. > > My guess as well. Anything to make Windows more convenient to use > than installing another OS. But you gotta think like a Microsoft > lawyer here: "But, your Honor, you CAN install Linux on the machine. > Just follow these simple 389 steps. No problem." ;-) > > > You know, "think of the children!". > > > > > Maybe, this is indicative of W10 being even more insecure than > > > previous Windows' OSes. > > > > Secure Boot itself is not actually such a bad idea, in some > > circumstances it might be nice to have a fully signed chain. IMHO. > > But it seems that Microsoft has co-opted it for their own use. > They're the only ones making and selling the signing keys aren't they? > Shouldn't those security keys come from an independent, unbiased > provider? One that Microsoft has to get their signing keys from, too. From what I understand, basically anyone can put their signing keys in the firmware. Part of the criticism is that Microsofts keys are already in it, making it difficult for anyone else, and without installing your own keys, you must use keys that have been derived from theirs. I may be wrong on this, I don't fully understand it. Canonical will also enforce Secure Boot in the future, they claim, and they are trying to get vendors to include their keys. I am more worried about distributions like Debian. Fedora has the backing of RedHat, so they will get keys (if they haven't already), SUSE has cash, but I have no idea about Debian. At some point Canonical would probably have helped them out, but I think that time has passed. They are mostly looking out for themselves these days. With Snappy, I don't even know if they will be based on Debian for much longer. And what about all the other distributions? Slackware, Gentoo, etc? There is no way all of them will be able to obtain keys. I agree; an independent signing authority would be the best, but I'd also like to see the ability to implant your own keys in the firmware. And even better, to remove them, so that I could delete the MSFT key. As mentioned, the Linux Foundation is looking into obtaining a key that can be used to sign for distributions. The problem is that MS is able to revoke keys at any time, and that would revoke all the Linux distributions at once. Eggs - basket. > > Hardware manufacturers will have to take into account the fact that > > there are a large number of people and organizations that run their > > machines without Windows, so I don't think there will be a lack of > > machines that can turn Secure Boot off in the near future. > > Have you forgotten about Asus and its $99 EeePC of a few years ago? > It only ran Linux. To keep the cost down. No OS license needed. It > sold very well, but was only a small part of Asus' Windows PC market. > Microsoft still threw a hissy fit and threatened to revoke Asus' > Windows license, if they didn't cnange the EeePC so it could run > Windows XP. Production on the EeePC ceased, and a year later a new > EeePC debuted running a stripped down version of XP. But now it cost > $199 not $99 whether it ran XP or Linux. And the consumer got > screwed. MS didn't care. They got their unit license fee. Ah, the MS tax. > Microsoft holds that Windows license over manufacturers like a battle > axe. If manufacturers don't go along, off with their heads! > Microsoft can (and does) get almost anything it wants, and they've > got a legal department that enables them to get away with it. I really, really wish Apple would release OS X for commodity hardware. That could probably give MS a (little) run for its money in the home market. Because let's face it - Linux isn't going to compete with them for the ordinary user anytime soon. Neither are the BSDs, or HURD, or Haiku, or... (Yes, I know Apple will never do that.) > > But will it become something to watch out for when buying new > > hardware? Most certainly, at least for a period of time. I have a > > sneaking suspicion that it might become a bigger problem for laptop > > users than for desktop users, although I'm unable to back that up. >
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Sun, 24 May 2015, Paul E Condon wrote: > > [BIG snip] > Two comments: > > 1) I saw a few days ago, an NewEgg.com advert. for a specialized > HD/SSD combo. from Western Digital. It is a drop-in replacement for a > SATA HD that combines in the same SATA physical outline, a 120GB SSD > and a 1TB backing store on HD. This for just over $100 on Memorial > Day sale. They must have figured out how to deal with UEFI. If they > can figure it out, surely open/libre people can copy the WD approach. I've seen similar hybrid drives on laptops as the default drives. Don't know how they are configured, but I'm assuming that the SSD holds the OS and apps for fast response times, and the spinning drive holds all data and/or backup and recovery partitions. > 2) Who among us would be willing to download and install software > from the NSA that says it will protect you from Microsoft? Who doubts > that NSA has the technology to break Microsoft's UEFI? A lot of people already use NSA software: SELinux. I'm not one. For servers, it's great for security; but for a user system, it's a waste of CPU cycles. I always turned it off when I ran Fedora. It was impossible to uninstall or seemed so. UEFI isn't the problem. Most all Linux distros support and can use it. It's Secure Boot which requires a Microsoft key that's the problem. If you can't turn it off, you can't install another OS. And if you want to dual or multi-boot with Windows 8.x, and presumably W10, a royal PIA to set up, if you can get it to work at all. Read that Red Hat, CentOS and SUSE purchased Secure Boot keys from MS for their OSes to make them compatible. B -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150524203140.53f92...@debian7.boseck208.net
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On 20150524_1739-0700, Patrick Bartek wrote: > On Sun, 24 May 2015, Petter Adsen wrote: > > > On Sat, 23 May 2015 12:46:10 -0700 > > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 23 May 2015, Petter Adsen wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat, 23 May 2015 09:04:55 -0700 > > > > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > > > I've read about that, but right now until W10 in its final form > > > > > is release, nobody really knows for sure. > > > > > > > > Well, yes and no. We *do* know that the status has changed from > > > > "mandatory" to "optional", but whether hardware manufacturers will > > > > actually remove the ability to turn Secure Boot off remains to be > > > > seen. > > > > > > Yes. I read that. Wonder what Microsoft has up its sleeve? > > > > If I were to guess, this is in preparation for at some point in the > > future requiring Secure Boot to be used, without the ability to turn > > it off. > > My guess as well. Anything to make Windows more convenient to use than > installing another OS. But you gotta think like a Microsoft lawyer > here: "But, your Honor, you CAN install Linux on the machine. Just > follow these simple 389 steps. No problem." ;-) > > > You know, "think of the children!". > > > > > Maybe, this is indicative of W10 being even more insecure than > > > previous Windows' OSes. > > > > Secure Boot itself is not actually such a bad idea, in some > > circumstances it might be nice to have a fully signed chain. IMHO. > > But it seems that Microsoft has co-opted it for their own use. They're > the only ones making and selling the signing keys aren't they? > Shouldn't those security keys come from an independent, unbiased > provider? One that Microsoft has to get their signing keys from, too. > > > In itself, it should help to make Windows *more* secure, but this is > > hardly the right place for that particular discussion. Nor do I > > care :) > > > > > > > I have no problems with turning Secure Boot off and leaving it > > > > > off. It's just that I fear that in the future one won't be able > > > > > to turn it off. And that will really throw a wrench in the > > > > > Linux community. We'll see. > > > > > > > > The Linux Foundation is also examining the possibility of > > > > obtaining a key that can be used to sign images for distributions > > > > (free of charge), and there is also work being done on signing a > > > > shim that will launch a "real" bootloader. As the Perl people > > > > lovingly remind us, there's more than one way to do it :) > > > > > > Where there's a will, there's a way I suppose. Although, instead > > > of a patch or shim, the threat of a class action lawsuit by Linux > > > developers might be more effective. > > > > Hardware manufacturers will have to take into account the fact that > > there are a large number of people and organizations that run their > > machines without Windows, so I don't think there will be a lack of > > machines that can turn Secure Boot off in the near future. > > Have you forgotten about Asus and its $99 EeePC of a few years ago? > It only ran Linux. To keep the cost down. No OS license needed. It > sold very well, but was only a small part of Asus' Windows PC market. > Microsoft still threw a hissy fit and threatened to revoke Asus' > Windows license, if they didn't cnange the EeePC so it could run > Windows XP. Production on the EeePC ceased, and a year later a new > EeePC debuted running a stripped down version of XP. But now it cost > $199 not $99 whether it ran XP or Linux. And the consumer got > screwed. MS didn't care. They got their unit license fee. > > Microsoft holds that Windows license over manufacturers like a battle > axe. If manufacturers don't go along, off with their heads! Microsoft > can (and does) get almost anything it wants, and they've got a legal > department that enables them to get away with it. > > > But will it become something to watch out for when buying new > > hardware? Most certainly, at least for a period of time. I have a > > sneaking suspicion that it might become a bigger problem for laptop > > users than for desktop users, although I'm unable to back that up. > > For those of us who prefer to build their own machines, I think it > > will be much less of a problem. > > Haven't you heard? The desktop machine is dead. Microsoft said so. > So, it must be true. ;-) > > > The cleanest option would probably be to allow the owner of the > > machine to install his/her own keys in the firmware, and sign the > > boot image with those. > > That won't fly. Microsoft will stop it. Not good for MS. > > > And we still have legacy mode. For now. > > Right. I expect Legacy to mostly disappear in the next couple years. > "Old, unneeded technology," they'll profess. > > > In my view, a solution for Linux that doesn't work for our BSD > > brethren and other people would not be good enough - we shouldn't > > settle for it. I remember all too well how hard it was to get Linux > > (or BSD, for that m
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Sun, 24 May 2015, Petter Adsen wrote: > On Sat, 23 May 2015 12:46:10 -0700 > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > On Sat, 23 May 2015, Petter Adsen wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 23 May 2015 09:04:55 -0700 > > > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > > I've read about that, but right now until W10 in its final form > > > > is release, nobody really knows for sure. > > > > > > Well, yes and no. We *do* know that the status has changed from > > > "mandatory" to "optional", but whether hardware manufacturers will > > > actually remove the ability to turn Secure Boot off remains to be > > > seen. > > > > Yes. I read that. Wonder what Microsoft has up its sleeve? > > If I were to guess, this is in preparation for at some point in the > future requiring Secure Boot to be used, without the ability to turn > it off. My guess as well. Anything to make Windows more convenient to use than installing another OS. But you gotta think like a Microsoft lawyer here: "But, your Honor, you CAN install Linux on the machine. Just follow these simple 389 steps. No problem." ;-) > You know, "think of the children!". > > > Maybe, this is indicative of W10 being even more insecure than > > previous Windows' OSes. > > Secure Boot itself is not actually such a bad idea, in some > circumstances it might be nice to have a fully signed chain. IMHO. But it seems that Microsoft has co-opted it for their own use. They're the only ones making and selling the signing keys aren't they? Shouldn't those security keys come from an independent, unbiased provider? One that Microsoft has to get their signing keys from, too. > In itself, it should help to make Windows *more* secure, but this is > hardly the right place for that particular discussion. Nor do I > care :) > > > > > I have no problems with turning Secure Boot off and leaving it > > > > off. It's just that I fear that in the future one won't be able > > > > to turn it off. And that will really throw a wrench in the > > > > Linux community. We'll see. > > > > > > The Linux Foundation is also examining the possibility of > > > obtaining a key that can be used to sign images for distributions > > > (free of charge), and there is also work being done on signing a > > > shim that will launch a "real" bootloader. As the Perl people > > > lovingly remind us, there's more than one way to do it :) > > > > Where there's a will, there's a way I suppose. Although, instead > > of a patch or shim, the threat of a class action lawsuit by Linux > > developers might be more effective. > > Hardware manufacturers will have to take into account the fact that > there are a large number of people and organizations that run their > machines without Windows, so I don't think there will be a lack of > machines that can turn Secure Boot off in the near future. Have you forgotten about Asus and its $99 EeePC of a few years ago? It only ran Linux. To keep the cost down. No OS license needed. It sold very well, but was only a small part of Asus' Windows PC market. Microsoft still threw a hissy fit and threatened to revoke Asus' Windows license, if they didn't cnange the EeePC so it could run Windows XP. Production on the EeePC ceased, and a year later a new EeePC debuted running a stripped down version of XP. But now it cost $199 not $99 whether it ran XP or Linux. And the consumer got screwed. MS didn't care. They got their unit license fee. Microsoft holds that Windows license over manufacturers like a battle axe. If manufacturers don't go along, off with their heads! Microsoft can (and does) get almost anything it wants, and they've got a legal department that enables them to get away with it. > But will it become something to watch out for when buying new > hardware? Most certainly, at least for a period of time. I have a > sneaking suspicion that it might become a bigger problem for laptop > users than for desktop users, although I'm unable to back that up. > For those of us who prefer to build their own machines, I think it > will be much less of a problem. Haven't you heard? The desktop machine is dead. Microsoft said so. So, it must be true. ;-) > The cleanest option would probably be to allow the owner of the > machine to install his/her own keys in the firmware, and sign the > boot image with those. That won't fly. Microsoft will stop it. Not good for MS. > And we still have legacy mode. For now. Right. I expect Legacy to mostly disappear in the next couple years. "Old, unneeded technology," they'll profess. > In my view, a solution for Linux that doesn't work for our BSD > brethren and other people would not be good enough - we shouldn't > settle for it. I remember all too well how hard it was to get Linux > (or BSD, for that matter) up and running with new hardware back in > the day, and I don't want a return to that state of things. > > There may very well be another Linus quietly tinkering away at > something that might become the Next Big Thing out there, and it would > be
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Sun, 24 May 2015 16:12:50 +0800 Bret Busby wrote: > Oh, and one thing that I forgot to mention, is that, due to the > immovable files, the Microshite Windows 8.x installation occupies > about 250GB of unusable disk space. > > Now, it has occurred to me that it could be a good idea to install > Debian Linux 6 LTS, on my super-dooper computer. > > So, I now have these questions. > > 1. Can Debian Linux 6 LTS be installed on a system that already has > Debian Linux 7 installed on the system, so as to have both versions of > Debian Linux, concurrently installed, and have the option of being > able to boot into either of those two operating systems, using the > Legacy boot system (it also has Ubuntu 14.04 LTS installed)? If both Wheezy and Trusty are installed in legacy mode the bootloader should see all of them. Dependent on your needs, an easier way might be to just spin up a VM or three with the systems you use the least. KVM is a wonderful thing. > 2. Can Debian Linux 6 LTS handle a GPT HDD, with partitions of up to > about 100GB, or does Debian Linux 6 LTS have a limit on the size of > the disk partitions that it can handle? Shouldn't be a problem. I think the limit on MBR disks is 2 or 3TB, and Squeeze handles GPT anyway. The limit on partition size with GPT is not practically reachable on a laptop today, but go ask Google if you want to know what it is. > 3. Can Debian Linux 6 LTS handle 32GB of RAM, or, does Debian Linux 6 > LTS have a limit on the amount of RAM that it can handle? It would depend on the kernel and userspace, but it has an amd64 port, yes. There is still a limit on how much RAM it can address, but it is not likely to become an issue, as it is most likely far, far more than you can fit in your laptop. Petter -- "I'm ionized" "Are you sure?" "I'm positive." pgpI8ZGgCdJrp.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On 24/05/2015, Bret Busby wrote: > On 23/05/2015, Petter Adsen wrote: >> On Fri, 22 May 2015 23:53:14 -0700 >> Patrick Bartek wrote: >> >>> >>> Researching a laptop purchase (within the next 6 months or so) to >>> replace my aging Desktop (1 to 8.5 years depending on which parts). >>> Going to abandoned the Big Box forever. Need to be very portable in >>> the next year or two. Two questions to begin: >>> >>> 1. Many laptops seem to only be able to turn off Secure Boot through >>> the OS, Windows 8.x, or so I've researched. However, I've read some >>> makes (Asus, Lenovo, Dell and HP) can do it directly through "BIOS" >>> without needing to boot Windows? True? Any others? >> >> I don't have a laptop myself (don't like them), but every one I've seen >> so far has had a switch to disable Secure Boot in the BIOS. AFAIK, that >> switch is mandatory to adhere to the "Built For Windows 8" MS program, > > I have previously posted, on this, and, I believe on the GRUB-HELP > list, my findings that, on the Acer computers, the Inshite setup > utility, that is used on Acer "laptop" computers, does not allow > SecureBoot to be switched off within the UEFI boot option; the only > way to not use the apparently Microshite mandated Secure Boot, is to > boot into the Legacy mode, which I have had to do on one system with > Debian 6 LTS installed, and, on a separate system, with Debian 7 > installed. > > The use of the Legacy boot system, rather than the UEFI boot system,, > was the only way that I could install Debian Linux, on both systems. > > Whilst I do not mind so much, booting into the Legacy mode, to use > Debian Linux, thereby avoiding Microshite Windows 8.x, which I have > found to be difficult to use, it kind of defeats the purpose of the > UEFI technology, when the UEFI technology is unusable due to the > Inshite Setup Utility. > Oh, and one thing that I forgot to mention, is that, due to the immovable files, the Microshite Windows 8.x installation occupies about 250GB of unusable disk space. Now, it has occurred to me that it could be a good idea to install Debian Linux 6 LTS, on my super-dooper computer. So, I now have these questions. 1. Can Debian Linux 6 LTS be installed on a system that already has Debian Linux 7 installed on the system, so as to have both versions of Debian Linux, concurrently installed, and have the option of being able to boot into either of those two operating systems, using the Legacy boot system (it also has Ubuntu 14.04 LTS installed)? 2. Can Debian Linux 6 LTS handle a GPT HDD, with partitions of up to about 100GB, or does Debian Linux 6 LTS have a limit on the size of the disk partitions that it can handle? 3. Can Debian Linux 6 LTS handle 32GB of RAM, or, does Debian Linux 6 LTS have a limit on the amount of RAM that it can handle? Thank you in anticipation. -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .. "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what the answer means." - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of Book 1 of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A Trilogy In Four Parts", written by Douglas Adams, published by Pan Books, 1992 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cacx6j8mfhhfkx4hmnvpespq1q2sq6k_mbdcsndtajxcniul...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On 23/05/2015, Petter Adsen wrote: > On Fri, 22 May 2015 23:53:14 -0700 > Patrick Bartek wrote: > >> >> Researching a laptop purchase (within the next 6 months or so) to >> replace my aging Desktop (1 to 8.5 years depending on which parts). >> Going to abandoned the Big Box forever. Need to be very portable in >> the next year or two. Two questions to begin: >> >> 1. Many laptops seem to only be able to turn off Secure Boot through >> the OS, Windows 8.x, or so I've researched. However, I've read some >> makes (Asus, Lenovo, Dell and HP) can do it directly through "BIOS" >> without needing to boot Windows? True? Any others? > > I don't have a laptop myself (don't like them), but every one I've seen > so far has had a switch to disable Secure Boot in the BIOS. AFAIK, that > switch is mandatory to adhere to the "Built For Windows 8" MS program, I have previously posted, on this, and, I believe on the GRUB-HELP list, my findings that, on the Acer computers, the Inshite setup utility, that is used on Acer "laptop" computers, does not allow SecureBoot to be switched off within the UEFI boot option; the only way to not use the apparently Microshite mandated Secure Boot, is to boot into the Legacy mode, which I have had to do on one system with Debian 6 LTS installed, and, on a separate system, with Debian 7 installed. The use of the Legacy boot system, rather than the UEFI boot system,, was the only way that I could install Debian Linux, on both systems. Whilst I do not mind so much, booting into the Legacy mode, to use Debian Linux, thereby avoiding Microshite Windows 8.x, which I have found to be difficult to use, it kind of defeats the purpose of the UEFI technology, when the UEFI technology is unusable due to the Inshite Setup Utility. -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .. "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what the answer means." - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of Book 1 of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A Trilogy In Four Parts", written by Douglas Adams, published by Pan Books, 1992 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CACX6j8P9oGcPrX7N5xuLCMYPANWW5FfUanaMd=xp8d3fz8l...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Sat, 23 May 2015 12:46:10 -0700 Patrick Bartek wrote: > On Sat, 23 May 2015, Petter Adsen wrote: > > > On Sat, 23 May 2015 09:04:55 -0700 > > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > I've read about that, but right now until W10 in its final form is > > > release, nobody really knows for sure. > > > > Well, yes and no. We *do* know that the status has changed from > > "mandatory" to "optional", but whether hardware manufacturers will > > actually remove the ability to turn Secure Boot off remains to be > > seen. > > Yes. I read that. Wonder what Microsoft has up its sleeve? If I were to guess, this is in preparation for at some point in the future requiring Secure Boot to be used, without the ability to turn it off. You know, "think of the children!". > Maybe, this is indicative of W10 being even more insecure than > previous Windows' OSes. Secure Boot itself is not actually such a bad idea, in some circumstances it might be nice to have a fully signed chain. IMHO. In itself, it should help to make Windows *more* secure, but this is hardly the right place for that particular discussion. Nor do I care :) > > > I have no problems with turning Secure Boot off and leaving it > > > off. It's just that I fear that in the future one won't be able > > > to turn it off. And that will really throw a wrench in the Linux > > > community. We'll see. > > > > The Linux Foundation is also examining the possibility of obtaining > > a key that can be used to sign images for distributions (free of > > charge), and there is also work being done on signing a shim that > > will launch a "real" bootloader. As the Perl people lovingly remind > > us, there's more than one way to do it :) > > Where there's a will, there's a way I suppose. Although, instead of a > patch or shim, the threat of a class action lawsuit by Linux > developers might be more effective. Hardware manufacturers will have to take into account the fact that there are a large number of people and organizations that run their machines without Windows, so I don't think there will be a lack of machines that can turn Secure Boot off in the near future. But will it become something to watch out for when buying new hardware? Most certainly, at least for a period of time. I have a sneaking suspicion that it might become a bigger problem for laptop users than for desktop users, although I'm unable to back that up. For those of us who prefer to build their own machines, I think it will be much less of a problem. The cleanest option would probably be to allow the owner of the machine to install his/her own keys in the firmware, and sign the boot image with those. And we still have legacy mode. For now. In my view, a solution for Linux that doesn't work for our BSD brethren and other people would not be good enough - we shouldn't settle for it. I remember all too well how hard it was to get Linux (or BSD, for that matter) up and running with new hardware back in the day, and I don't want a return to that state of things. There may very well be another Linus quietly tinkering away at something that might become the Next Big Thing out there, and it would be a shame if we were to limit hardware to not make that possible. I am also not sure MS really _wants_ to lock Linux/others out of the playing field. If they do, I assume the murmurs of class-action and anti-competition would rise in pitch, and someone might do something that could *really* hurt them. They really should work with the community to come up with a solution that works for everyone before someone forces them to. Petter -- "I'm ionized" "Are you sure?" "I'm positive." pgppYMaPIKOqg.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Sat, 23 May 2015, Petter Adsen wrote: > On Sat, 23 May 2015 09:04:55 -0700 > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > On Sat, 23 May 2015, Petter Adsen wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 22 May 2015 23:53:14 -0700 > > > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Researching a laptop purchase (within the next 6 months or so) > > > > to replace my aging Desktop (1 to 8.5 years depending on which > > > > parts). Going to abandoned the Big Box forever. Need to be very > > > > portable in the next year or two. Two questions to begin: > > > > > > > > 1. Many laptops seem to only be able to turn off Secure Boot > > > > through the OS, Windows 8.x, or so I've researched. However, > > > > I've read some makes (Asus, Lenovo, Dell and HP) can do it > > > > directly through "BIOS" without needing to boot Windows? True? > > > > Any others? > > > > > > I don't have a laptop myself (don't like them), but every one I've > > > seen so far has had a switch to disable Secure Boot in the BIOS. > > > AFAIK, that switch is mandatory to adhere to the "Built For > > > Windows 8" MS program, although it is only optional for the > > > coming Windows 10 program. That might be something to watch out > > > for. > > > > I've read about that, but right now until W10 in its final form is > > release, nobody really knows for sure. > > Well, yes and no. We *do* know that the status has changed from > "mandatory" to "optional", but whether hardware manufacturers will > actually remove the ability to turn Secure Boot off remains to be > seen. Yes. I read that. Wonder what Microsoft has up its sleeve? Maybe, this is indicative of W10 being even more insecure than previous Windows' OSes. > > > If this is going to become a real problem or not, we will just > > > have to wait and see. > > > > > > > 2. How UEFI compatible is Debian Wheezy? What I'm running on > > > > the Desktop. Or is Jessie the better choice. Or something else > > > > entirely? Except Ubuntu variants (Hate it!). I don't want to > > > > run in Legacy mode for future compatibility. I won't be > > > > installing a desktop, just a window manager. Probably Openbox. > > > > > > You can find details here: > > > > > > https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/ch03s06.html.en#UEFI > > > > Yes, I read that during my initial research. > > > > > I believe the Canonical people have put some effort into becoming > > > fully Secure Boot-compliant, but if you do not like them, then > > > that is not an option. There are also others (RedHat?) but I can't > > > remember who. > > > > That compatibility comes from the Linux manufacturer buying a > > Microsoft Secure Boot key which Canonical and RH have. SUSE, too, I > > think. Don't know how much that costs them. I prefer not to have > > Linux under Microsoft's thumb that way. > > I absolutely agree. > > > I have no problems with turning Secure Boot off and leaving it off. > > It's just that I fear that in the future one won't be able to turn > > it off. And that will really throw a wrench in the Linux community. > > We'll see. > > The Linux Foundation is also examining the possibility of obtaining a > key that can be used to sign images for distributions (free of > charge), and there is also work being done on signing a shim that > will launch a "real" bootloader. As the Perl people lovingly remind > us, there's more than one way to do it :) Where there's a will, there's a way I suppose. Although, instead of a patch or shim, the threat of a class action lawsuit by Linux developers might be more effective. B -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150523124610.3b20e...@debian7.boseck208.net
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Sat, 23 May 2015 09:04:55 -0700 Patrick Bartek wrote: > On Sat, 23 May 2015, Petter Adsen wrote: > > > On Fri, 22 May 2015 23:53:14 -0700 > > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > > > > > > Researching a laptop purchase (within the next 6 months or so) to > > > replace my aging Desktop (1 to 8.5 years depending on which > > > parts). Going to abandoned the Big Box forever. Need to be very > > > portable in the next year or two. Two questions to begin: > > > > > > 1. Many laptops seem to only be able to turn off Secure Boot > > > through the OS, Windows 8.x, or so I've researched. However, > > > I've read some makes (Asus, Lenovo, Dell and HP) can do it > > > directly through "BIOS" without needing to boot Windows? True? > > > Any others? > > > > I don't have a laptop myself (don't like them), but every one I've > > seen so far has had a switch to disable Secure Boot in the BIOS. > > AFAIK, that switch is mandatory to adhere to the "Built For Windows > > 8" MS program, although it is only optional for the coming Windows > > 10 program. That might be something to watch out for. > > I've read about that, but right now until W10 in its final form is > release, nobody really knows for sure. Well, yes and no. We *do* know that the status has changed from "mandatory" to "optional", but whether hardware manufacturers will actually remove the ability to turn Secure Boot off remains to be seen. > > If this is going to become a real problem or not, we will just have > > to wait and see. > > > > > 2. How UEFI compatible is Debian Wheezy? What I'm running on the > > > Desktop. Or is Jessie the better choice. Or something else > > > entirely? Except Ubuntu variants (Hate it!). I don't want to run > > > in Legacy mode for future compatibility. I won't be installing a > > > desktop, just a window manager. Probably Openbox. > > > > You can find details here: > > > > https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/ch03s06.html.en#UEFI > > Yes, I read that during my initial research. > > > I believe the Canonical people have put some effort into becoming > > fully Secure Boot-compliant, but if you do not like them, then that > > is not an option. There are also others (RedHat?) but I can't > > remember who. > > That compatibility comes from the Linux manufacturer buying a > Microsoft Secure Boot key which Canonical and RH have. SUSE, too, I > think. Don't know how much that costs them. I prefer not to have > Linux under Microsoft's thumb that way. I absolutely agree. > I have no problems with turning Secure Boot off and leaving it off. > It's just that I fear that in the future one won't be able to turn > it off. And that will really throw a wrench in the Linux community. > We'll see. The Linux Foundation is also examining the possibility of obtaining a key that can be used to sign images for distributions (free of charge), and there is also work being done on signing a shim that will launch a "real" bootloader. As the Perl people lovingly remind us, there's more than one way to do it :) Petter -- "I'm ionized" "Are you sure?" "I'm positive." pgpWNbZuGkvwx.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Sat, 23 May 2015, Petter Adsen wrote: > On Fri, 22 May 2015 23:53:14 -0700 > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > > > Researching a laptop purchase (within the next 6 months or so) to > > replace my aging Desktop (1 to 8.5 years depending on which parts). > > Going to abandoned the Big Box forever. Need to be very portable in > > the next year or two. Two questions to begin: > > > > 1. Many laptops seem to only be able to turn off Secure Boot through > > the OS, Windows 8.x, or so I've researched. However, I've read some > > makes (Asus, Lenovo, Dell and HP) can do it directly through "BIOS" > > without needing to boot Windows? True? Any others? > > I don't have a laptop myself (don't like them), but every one I've > seen so far has had a switch to disable Secure Boot in the BIOS. > AFAIK, that switch is mandatory to adhere to the "Built For Windows > 8" MS program, although it is only optional for the coming Windows 10 > program. That might be something to watch out for. I've read about that, but right now until W10 in its final form is release, nobody really knows for sure. > If this is going to become a real problem or not, we will just have to > wait and see. > > > 2. How UEFI compatible is Debian Wheezy? What I'm running on the > > Desktop. Or is Jessie the better choice. Or something else > > entirely? Except Ubuntu variants (Hate it!). I don't want to run > > in Legacy mode for future compatibility. I won't be installing a > > desktop, just a window manager. Probably Openbox. > > You can find details here: > > https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/ch03s06.html.en#UEFI Yes, I read that during my initial research. > I believe the Canonical people have put some effort into becoming > fully Secure Boot-compliant, but if you do not like them, then that > is not an option. There are also others (RedHat?) but I can't > remember who. That compatibility comes from the Linux manufacturer buying a Microsoft Secure Boot key which Canonical and RH have. SUSE, too, I think. Don't know how much that costs them. I prefer not to have Linux under Microsoft's thumb that way. I have no problems with turning Secure Boot off and leaving it off. It's just that I fear that in the future one won't be able to turn it off. And that will really throw a wrench in the Linux community. We'll see. Thanks for your input. B -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150523090455.73d0c...@debian7.boseck208.net
Re: Laptops, UEFI, Secure Boot and Debian
On Fri, 22 May 2015 23:53:14 -0700 Patrick Bartek wrote: > > Researching a laptop purchase (within the next 6 months or so) to > replace my aging Desktop (1 to 8.5 years depending on which parts). > Going to abandoned the Big Box forever. Need to be very portable in > the next year or two. Two questions to begin: > > 1. Many laptops seem to only be able to turn off Secure Boot through > the OS, Windows 8.x, or so I've researched. However, I've read some > makes (Asus, Lenovo, Dell and HP) can do it directly through "BIOS" > without needing to boot Windows? True? Any others? I don't have a laptop myself (don't like them), but every one I've seen so far has had a switch to disable Secure Boot in the BIOS. AFAIK, that switch is mandatory to adhere to the "Built For Windows 8" MS program, although it is only optional for the coming Windows 10 program. That might be something to watch out for. If this is going to become a real problem or not, we will just have to wait and see. > 2. How UEFI compatible is Debian Wheezy? What I'm running on the > Desktop. Or is Jessie the better choice. Or something else > entirely? Except Ubuntu variants (Hate it!). I don't want to run in > Legacy mode for future compatibility. I won't be installing a > desktop, just a window manager. Probably Openbox. You can find details here: https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/ch03s06.html.en#UEFI I believe the Canonical people have put some effort into becoming fully Secure Boot-compliant, but if you do not like them, then that is not an option. There are also others (RedHat?) but I can't remember who. Petter -- "I'm ionized" "Are you sure?" "I'm positive." pgpuU4SQ3PZja.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
