[Group.of.nepali.translators] [Bug 1684341] Re: EFI fallback binary should not be installed in --removable mode

2017-06-19 Thread Launchpad Bug Tracker 
This bug was fixed in the package grub2 - 2.02~beta3-4ubuntu2.1

---
grub2 (2.02~beta3-4ubuntu2.1) zesty; urgency=medium

  * debian/patches/install_signed.patch: don't install fb$arch.efi; it breaks
"removable" installs where files are all installed to /EFI/BOOT; and it
also doesn't belong in the /EFI/ubuntu path for the default case. Fallback
install simply needs more work and isn't ready for SRU. (LP: #1684341)
  * debian/postinst.in: clean up fb$arch.efi.

 -- Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre   Wed, 24 May 2017
16:25:17 -0400

** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu Zesty)
   Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released

** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu Yakkety)
   Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of नेपाली
भाषा समायोजकहरुको समूह, which is subscribed to Xenial.
Matching subscriptions: Ubuntu 16.04 Bugs
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1684341

Title:
  EFI fallback binary should not be installed in --removable mode

Status in cloud-images:
  New
Status in grub2 package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in grub2 source package in Trusty:
  Confirmed
Status in grub2 source package in Xenial:
  Fix Released
Status in grub2 source package in Yakkety:
  Fix Released
Status in grub2 source package in Zesty:
  Fix Released

Bug description:
  [Impact]
  Building some images depending on calling grub-install --removable still 
installs fbx64.efi; which we don't want on removable media.

  [Test case]
  On an EFI system, run 'grub-install --removable --target=x86_64-efi'. Observe 
whether fbx64.efi is installed to /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT. It should not.

  [Regression potential]
  If any system is depending on running grub-install with --removable, and on 
fbx64.efi being installed in /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT; this would cause this 
assumption to fail -- leading to incorrect fallback behavior when BootEntries 
are not present on a system.

  Failures to boot with "System BootOrder not found" errors should be
  considered a possible regression.

  Any missing files in /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT or /boot/efi/EFI/ubuntu after
  install should be considered a potential regression of this update.

  
  

  
  The patch I did to fix names for the new naming of shim binaries included the 
addition of fbx64.efi; but it was done wrong: fbx64.efi should only exist under 
\EFI\BOOT, it's not required in the "removable" path; except if we're trying to 
force installing to the removable path *too*.

  In other words:
  1) we normally don't want /EFI/ubuntu/fbx64.efi to exist;

  and
  a) on a desktop or server, we want /EFI/BOOT/fbx64.efi to exist (ie. installs 
without --removable, and with --force-extra-removable used when grub-install 
was called);
  b) on removable media, we do not want /EFI/BOOT/fbx64.efi to exist (ie. when 
grub-installed is called with --removable).

  Furthermore, the (a) case is probably not the typical case we want to
  run grub-install with. Calls to grub-install with --force-extra-
  removable probably should be limited to shim-signed's postinst.

  In any case, let's move the fbx64.efi installation step to
  also_install_removable() in grub-installer to avoid installing it when
  it shouldn't be.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/cloud-images/+bug/1684341/+subscriptions

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~group.of.nepali.translators
Post to : group.of.nepali.translators@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~group.of.nepali.translators
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

[Group.of.nepali.translators] [Bug 1684341] Re: EFI fallback binary should not be installed in --removable mode

2017-06-15 Thread Launchpad Bug Tracker 
This bug was fixed in the package grub2 - 2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.11

---
grub2 (2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.11) xenial; urgency=medium

  * Fix syntax error in debian/postinst.in.  (LP #1692181)

 -- Steve Langasek   Sat, 20 May 2017
12:59:17 -0700

** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu Xenial)
   Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of नेपाली
भाषा समायोजकहरुको समूह, which is subscribed to Xenial.
Matching subscriptions: Ubuntu 16.04 Bugs
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1684341

Title:
  EFI fallback binary should not be installed in --removable mode

Status in cloud-images:
  New
Status in grub2 package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in grub2 source package in Trusty:
  Confirmed
Status in grub2 source package in Xenial:
  Fix Released
Status in grub2 source package in Yakkety:
  Fix Committed
Status in grub2 source package in Zesty:
  Fix Committed

Bug description:
  [Impact]
  Building some images depending on calling grub-install --removable still 
installs fbx64.efi; which we don't want on removable media.

  [Test case]
  On an EFI system, run 'grub-install --removable --target=x86_64-efi'. Observe 
whether fbx64.efi is installed to /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT. It should not.

  [Regression potential]
  If any system is depending on running grub-install with --removable, and on 
fbx64.efi being installed in /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT; this would cause this 
assumption to fail -- leading to incorrect fallback behavior when BootEntries 
are not present on a system.

  Failures to boot with "System BootOrder not found" errors should be
  considered a possible regression.

  Any missing files in /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT or /boot/efi/EFI/ubuntu after
  install should be considered a potential regression of this update.

  
  

  
  The patch I did to fix names for the new naming of shim binaries included the 
addition of fbx64.efi; but it was done wrong: fbx64.efi should only exist under 
\EFI\BOOT, it's not required in the "removable" path; except if we're trying to 
force installing to the removable path *too*.

  In other words:
  1) we normally don't want /EFI/ubuntu/fbx64.efi to exist;

  and
  a) on a desktop or server, we want /EFI/BOOT/fbx64.efi to exist (ie. installs 
without --removable, and with --force-extra-removable used when grub-install 
was called);
  b) on removable media, we do not want /EFI/BOOT/fbx64.efi to exist (ie. when 
grub-installed is called with --removable).

  Furthermore, the (a) case is probably not the typical case we want to
  run grub-install with. Calls to grub-install with --force-extra-
  removable probably should be limited to shim-signed's postinst.

  In any case, let's move the fbx64.efi installation step to
  also_install_removable() in grub-installer to avoid installing it when
  it shouldn't be.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/cloud-images/+bug/1684341/+subscriptions

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~group.of.nepali.translators
Post to : group.of.nepali.translators@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~group.of.nepali.translators
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

[Group.of.nepali.translators] [Bug 1684341] Re: EFI fallback binary should not be installed in --removable mode

2017-05-11 Thread Dan Watkins 
** Also affects: cloud-images
   Importance: Undecided
   Status: New

** Changed in: cloud-images
   Importance: Undecided => High

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of नेपाली
भाषा समायोजकहरुको समूह, which is subscribed to Xenial.
Matching subscriptions: Ubuntu 16.04 Bugs
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1684341

Title:
  EFI fallback binary should not be installed in --removable mode

Status in cloud-images:
  New
Status in grub2 package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in grub2 source package in Trusty:
  Confirmed
Status in grub2 source package in Xenial:
  Confirmed
Status in grub2 source package in Yakkety:
  Confirmed
Status in grub2 source package in Zesty:
  In Progress

Bug description:
  [Impact]
  Building some images depending on calling grub-install --removable still 
installs fbx64.efi; which we don't want on removable media.

  [Test case]
  On an EFI system, run 'grub-install --removable --target=x86_64-efi'. Observe 
whether fbx64.efi is installed to /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT. It should not.

  [Regression potential]
  If any system is depending on running grub-install with --removable, and on 
fbx64.efi being installed in /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT; this would cause this 
assumption to fail -- leading to incorrect fallback behavior when BootEntries 
are not present on a system.

  Failures to boot with "System BootOrder not found" errors should be
  considered a possible regression.

  Any missing files in /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT or /boot/efi/EFI/ubuntu after
  install should be considered a potential regression of this update.

  
  

  
  The patch I did to fix names for the new naming of shim binaries included the 
addition of fbx64.efi; but it was done wrong: fbx64.efi should only exist under 
\EFI\BOOT, it's not required in the "removable" path; except if we're trying to 
force installing to the removable path *too*.

  In other words:
  1) we normally don't want /EFI/ubuntu/fbx64.efi to exist;

  and
  a) on a desktop or server, we want /EFI/BOOT/fbx64.efi to exist (ie. installs 
without --removable, and with --force-extra-removable used when grub-install 
was called);
  b) on removable media, we do not want /EFI/BOOT/fbx64.efi to exist (ie. when 
grub-installed is called with --removable).

  Furthermore, the (a) case is probably not the typical case we want to
  run grub-install with. Calls to grub-install with --force-extra-
  removable probably should be limited to shim-signed's postinst.

  In any case, let's move the fbx64.efi installation step to
  also_install_removable() in grub-installer to avoid installing it when
  it shouldn't be.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/cloud-images/+bug/1684341/+subscriptions

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~group.of.nepali.translators
Post to : group.of.nepali.translators@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~group.of.nepali.translators
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

[Group.of.nepali.translators] [Bug 1684341] Re: EFI fallback binary should not be installed in --removable mode

2017-04-27 Thread Launchpad Bug Tracker 
This bug was fixed in the package grub2 - 2.02~beta3-4ubuntu3

---
grub2 (2.02~beta3-4ubuntu3) artful; urgency=medium

  * debian/patches/install_signed.patch, grub-install-extra-removable.patch:
- Make sure if we install shim; it should also be exported as the default
  bootloader to install later to a removable path, if we do.
- Rework grub-install-extra-removable.patch to reverse its logic: in the
  default case, install the bootloader to /EFI/BOOT, unless we're trying
  to install on a removable device, or explicitly telling grub *not* to
  do it.
- Move installing fb$arch.efi to --no-extra-removable; as we don't want
  fallback to be installed unless we're also installing to /EFI/BOOT.
  (LP: #1684341)

 -- Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre   Wed, 26 Apr 2017
21:08:22 -0400

** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu)
   Status: In Progress => Fix Released

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of नेपाली
भाषा समायोजकहरुको समूह, which is subscribed to Xenial.
Matching subscriptions: Ubuntu 16.04 Bugs
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1684341

Title:
  EFI fallback binary should not be installed in --removable mode

Status in grub2 package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in grub2 source package in Trusty:
  New
Status in grub2 source package in Xenial:
  New
Status in grub2 source package in Yakkety:
  New
Status in grub2 source package in Zesty:
  In Progress

Bug description:
  [Impact]
  Building some images depending on calling grub-install --removable still 
installs fbx64.efi; which we don't want on removable media.

  [Test case]
  On an EFI system, run 'grub-install --removable --target=x86_64-efi'. Observe 
whether fbx64.efi is installed to /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT. It should not.

  [Regression potential]
  If any system is depending on running grub-install with --removable, and on 
fbx64.efi being installed in /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT; this would cause this 
assumption to fail -- leading to incorrect fallback behavior when BootEntries 
are not present on a system.

  Failures to boot with "System BootOrder not found" errors should be
  considered a possible regression.

  Any missing files in /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT or /boot/efi/EFI/ubuntu after
  install should be considered a potential regression of this update.

  
  

  
  The patch I did to fix names for the new naming of shim binaries included the 
addition of fbx64.efi; but it was done wrong: fbx64.efi should only exist under 
\EFI\BOOT, it's not required in the "removable" path; except if we're trying to 
force installing to the removable path *too*.

  In other words:
  1) we normally don't want /EFI/ubuntu/fbx64.efi to exist;

  and
  a) on a desktop or server, we want /EFI/BOOT/fbx64.efi to exist (ie. installs 
without --removable, and with --force-extra-removable used when grub-install 
was called);
  b) on removable media, we do not want /EFI/BOOT/fbx64.efi to exist (ie. when 
grub-installed is called with --removable).

  Furthermore, the (a) case is probably not the typical case we want to
  run grub-install with. Calls to grub-install with --force-extra-
  removable probably should be limited to shim-signed's postinst.

  In any case, let's move the fbx64.efi installation step to
  also_install_removable() in grub-installer to avoid installing it when
  it shouldn't be.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/1684341/+subscriptions

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~group.of.nepali.translators
Post to : group.of.nepali.translators@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~group.of.nepali.translators
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp