> Ian Jackson writes ("Bug#792547: grub-installer: add option to _not_ install
> to UEFI boot order"):
> > I see that Ian C updated this patch (in July 2015) and reported
> > testing it successfully. Is it now OK ?
>
> every Debian release I update our
Ian Jackson writes ("Bug#792547: grub-installer: add option to _not_ install to
UEFI boot order"):
> I see that Ian C updated this patch (in July 2015) and reported
> testing it successfully. Is it now OK ?
every Debian release I update our workaround to apply to the current
rel
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 patch
Bug #931917 [grub-installer] grub-installer: call efibootmgr (if available) to
keep track of boot order/options
Added tag(s) patch.
--
931917: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=931917
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact
Control: tag -1 patch
Cyril Brulebois (2019-07-12):
> With stretch, we were getting efibootmgr's output in the installer's
> syslog, which could help track down issues related to the boot sequence.
>
> With buster, due to grub2's switch to using libefi* (since both the
> 2.02+dfsg1-14 and
Package: grub-installer
Version: 1.165
Severity: important
With stretch, we were getting efibootmgr's output in the installer's
syslog, which could help track down issues related to the boot sequence.
With buster, due to grub2's switch to using libefi* (since both the
2.02+dfsg1-14 and
at all if you don't add a boot
> entry for it? The grub is installed by this installer after.
>
> There is nothing that makes the latest install boot unless you add it
> to the boot order. On legacy bios it was different because there you
> just put what you wanted into the MBR boot
admin intervenes. Where in this process is a
> requirement to tinker with the UEFI menu?
How are you supposed to get grub to run at all if you don't add a boot
entry for it? The grub is installed by this installer after.
There is nothing that makes the latest install boot unless you add it
to
On Wed, 2018-02-28 at 02:16 +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 09:01:18PM -0500, Dan Norton wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 10:40:20 -0500
> > lsore...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen) wrote:
> > >
> > > With UEFI, adding an entry to the boot meny is what you do when
> >
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 09:01:18PM -0500, Dan Norton wrote:
>On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 10:40:20 -0500
>lsore...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen) wrote:
>>
>> With UEFI, adding an entry to the boot meny is what you do when you
>> install an OS you want to be able to boot. UEFI does not rely on
uot; the term "Hard Drive" is
> > replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in the boot
> > order.
> >
> > The PC is:
> > Hewlett-Packard HP Pro 3400 Series MT/2ABF, BIOS 7.16 03/23/2012
> >
> > Please tell me the justification for
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 05:42:36PM -0500, Dan Norton wrote:
> I would hate to have to do something because windows does it :-)
>
> No one's yet mentioned secure boot as a justification. AIUI some
> manufacturers are making it so that you can't even disable secure boot.
> How will you multi-boot
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 05:42:36PM -0500, Dan Norton wrote:
> No one's yet mentioned secure boot as a justification. AIUI some
> manufacturers are making it so that you can't even disable secure boot.
> How will you multi-boot linux and windows, or replace windows entirely
> with such a machine?
uot; the term "Hard Drive" is
> > replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in the boot
> > order.
> >
> > The PC is:
> > Hewlett-Packard HP Pro 3400 Series MT/2ABF, BIOS 7.16 03/23/2012
> >
> > Please tell me the justification for
ot; in the bios menu and make it first? In
> >>its past life, this PC ran Windows 7 but in order to boot from
> >>mountable media there was no need for the user to change the boot
> >>order.
> >
> >You've been bitten by an unexpected change due to your PC's
On Mon, 2018-02-26 at 16:54 +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> It seems Dan Norton has decided to selfishly make *his* spam problem
> into everybody else's spam problem, and I've just had a bounce
> message
> in response to my mail below, saying I have to ask to be added to his
> list of allowed
y/CD
>> USB Hard Drive
>>Legacy Boot Sources
>> [...]
>>
>>If done by firmware, wouldn't grub or the installer have to tell
>>the firmware to put "debian" in the bios menu and make it first? In its
>>past life, this PC ran Windows 7 but in order
t grub or the installer have to tell
>the firmware to put "debian" in the bios menu and make it first? In its
>past life, this PC ran Windows 7 but in order to boot from mountable
>media there was no need for the user to change the boot order.
You've been bitten by an unexpected chan
e" is
>> replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in the boot order.
>>
>> The PC is:
>> Hewlett-Packard HP Pro 3400 Series MT/2ABF, BIOS 7.16 03/23/2012
>>
>> Please tell me the justification for putting "debian" in the m
On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 10:18:00PM -0500, Dan Norton wrote:
> Installing either stretch or buster via netinst results in changes to
> the bios menu. Under "UEFI Boot Sources" the term "Hard Drive" is
> replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in th
Fri, 2018-02-23 at 22:18 -0500, Dan Norton wrote:
> > > > Installing either stretch or buster via netinst results in changes
> > > > to the bios menu. Under "UEFI Boot Sources" the term "Hard Drive"
> > > > is replaced with "debian" and
uster via netinst results in changes
> > > to the bios menu. Under "UEFI Boot Sources" the term "Hard Drive"
> > > is replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in the boot
> > > order.
> > >
> > > The PC is:
>
On 02/25/2018 02:35 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Sat, 2018-02-24 at 14:18 -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
On 02/24/2018 01:59 PM, Dan Norton wrote:
[snip]
In my case, there are multiple debian installations and the
installer
positions the last installation at the top of the *grub* menu. This
On Sat, 2018-02-24 at 14:18 -0600, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 02/24/2018 01:59 PM, Dan Norton wrote:
> > [snip]
> >
> > In my case, there are multiple debian installations and the
> installer
> > positions the last installation at the top of the *grub* menu. This
> > makes sense.
>
> Not always.
os-prober which
created menu entries in partition number order.
With your many installs, have you needed to edit the bios menu so that
you could boot something mountable? IOW is debian first in the boot
order?
I have older machines. I only encounter a so-called legacy bios.
E.G. I type this
NLY hard disk. I'd love to see an os-prober which
> created menu entries in partition number order.
>
With your many installs, have you needed to edit the bios menu so that
you could boot something mountable? IOW is debian first in the boot
order?
>
>
> > But why change the *
ldn't grub or the installer have to tell
the firmware to put "debian" in the bios menu and make it first? In its
past life, this PC ran Windows 7 but in order to boot from mountable
media there was no need for the user to change the boot order.
- Dan
rm "Hard Drive" is
> > replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in the boot
> > order.
> >
> > The PC is:
> > Hewlett-Packard HP Pro 3400 Series MT/2ABF, BIOS 7.16 03/23/2012
> >
> > Please tell me the justificati
On Fri, 2018-02-23 at 22:18 -0500, Dan Norton wrote:
> Installing either stretch or buster via netinst results in changes to
> the bios menu. Under "UEFI Boot Sources" the term "Hard Drive" is
> replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in the boot o
On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 10:18:00PM -0500, Dan Norton wrote:
> Installing either stretch or buster via netinst results in changes to
> the bios menu. Under "UEFI Boot Sources" the term "Hard Drive" is
> replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in th
Installing either stretch or buster via netinst results in changes to
the bios menu. Under "UEFI Boot Sources" the term "Hard Drive" is
replaced with "debian" and this entry is put first in the boot order.
The PC is:
Hewlett-Packard HP Pro 3400 Series MT/2ABF, BIOS 7
Control: block 789798 by 792547
I've tested both of these patches (grub-installer [0] and grub2 [1]
together but the grub-installer one doesn't do much without the grub2
one, since it appears that the installation of the grub-* packages also
ends up running grub-install during installation.
Ian.
also
ends up running grub-install during installation.
To clarify, I rebuilt the Jessie d-i version with this modified
grub-installer included in the initrd and did two tests:
A normal x86/UEFI install, from mini.iso, which showed no change in
behaviour (i.e. Debian was added to the boot order
: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:17:40 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Allow avoiding installation to NVRAM on EFI or IEEE1275
systems
On systems which demand greater control over the boot order (e.g. ones which
PXE boot) it is useful to avoid messing with this during installation.
(Closes: #789798)
---
debian
Processing control commands:
block 789798 by 792547
Bug #789798 [grub-installer] grub-installer: add option to _not_ install to
UEFI boot order
789798 was blocked by: 792547
789798 was not blocking any bugs.
Ignoring request to alter blocking bugs of bug #789798 to the same blocks
previously
Processing control commands:
block 789798 by 792547
Bug #789798 [grub-installer] grub-installer: add option to _not_ install to
UEFI boot order
789798 was not blocked by any bugs.
789798 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 789798: 792547
--
789798: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi
On Wed, 2015-06-24 at 16:02 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
+# Should we avoid installing/registering GRUB in NVRAM?
+ db_input low grub-installer/no-nvram || [ $? -eq 30 ]
+ db_go || exit 10
+ db_get grub-installer/no-nvram
+
On Mon, 2015-06-29 at 14:12 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
diff --git a/debian/grub-installer.templates
b/debian/grub-installer.templates
index e294afb..e5d090b 100644
--- a/debian/grub-installer.templates
+++ b/debian/grub-installer.templates
@@ -285,3 +285,15 @@ _Description: Force GRUB
install Debian inserts itself into the UEFI boot
order _before_ the PXE entry, this happens via grub-installer.udeb -
grub-install (from the main grub deb) - efibootmgr -c.
This means that when we come to want to regroove the box it won't boot from
PXE.
grub-install offers an option to avoid
the PXE
grub.efi to the one on the ESP (using grub-installer/force-efi-extra-removable
for simplicity, but that's by the by, I think).
This is for automated testing which does a fresh install before most tests.
The problem is that during install Debian inserts itself into the UEFI boot
order _before_
39 matches
Mail list logo
