Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GRUB 2.00 Boot-Loader Release Is Imminent

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • GRUB 2.00 Boot-Loader Release Is Imminent

    Phoronix: GRUB 2.00 Boot-Loader Release Is Imminent

    After being in development for many years, GRUB 2.00 will be released in the coming days...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTEyODA

  • #2
    Push ZFS from GRUB into the Linux kernel

    GRUB is licensed under the GNU GPL and includes basic ZFS file system support.
    I understand that this is just basic ZFS support to initialize the file system and doesn't include advanced functionality.

    But why isn't this code pushed into the Linux kernel to provide the kernel with some rudimentary ZFS support?

    Some basic ZFS support in the Linux kernel would still be useful and be a nice addition. Also it could be a starting point for further development.

    Comment


    • #3
      Coming and going at the same time

      Now finally GRUB 2 is about to come. The long awaited release.

      But GRUB 2 is under the GPLv3, and now with the new UEFI systems shipping with Secure Boot, the distributions are ditching GRUB since they cant ship GRUB 2 with their cryptographic key since the GPLv3 says they must make any such key available and if they do so, their certificate gets revoked.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by uid313 View Post
        Now finally GRUB 2 is about to come. The long awaited release.

        But GRUB 2 is under the GPLv3, and now with the new UEFI systems shipping with Secure Boot, the distributions are ditching GRUB since they cant ship GRUB 2 with their cryptographic key since the GPLv3 says they must make any such key available and if they do so, their certificate gets revoked.
        I think that douchebuntu is flipping out over nothing.
        The part they're looking at is where it talks about keys that are required to make a modified version functional. It doesn't say that it has to function on ALL HARDWARE.

        In theory, UEFI securecrap is supposed to be something that can be disabled, hence keys are a CONVENIENCE ONLY, NOT required. On those systems where it can't be disabled, this is simply broken hardware and not the responsibility of distro builders.

        SECONDLY, the installation of this software will be BY THE USER, not from the factory, therefore distro can include disclaimer "not supported on hardware with broken UEFI implementation".


        Naturally, hardware vendors shipping this software pre-installed will have to ensure that the UEFI securecrap can be disabled on that hardware.

        Comment


        • #5
          GRUB2 gets released, UEFI-enabled motherboards show up soon, GRUB2 jumps from final release to maintenance mode, end of GRUB2's story.
          Last edited by mark45; 06-27-2012, 11:31 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by mark45 View Post
            GRUB2 gets released, UEFI-enabled motherboards show up soon, GRUB2 jumps from final release to maintenance mode, end of GRUB2's story.
            GRUB 2 has excellent UEFI support even if it can't handle Secure Boot. I would assume that most distributions will work out of the box only if you disable Secure Boot anyway.

            Comment


            • #7
              GRUB 2:
              Platform: IA-32, x86-64, PowerPC

              Too bad no support for ARM, SPARC, MIPS.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Teho View Post
                GRUB 2 has excellent UEFI support even if it can't handle Secure Boot. I would assume that most distributions will work out of the box only if you disable Secure Boot anyway.
                Sure, except THE LINUX DISTRO (and probably others will follow) won't use it by default on UEFI boxes:
                So, the bad news first: at this point, we are not planning to use GRUB 2
                by default on systems with secure boot enabled. As a search through its
                ChangeLog will show, we've put a considerable amount of upstream
                development effort into GRUB 2 and we hope to carry on doing so, so this
                wasn't an easy decision.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I would really like to see grub 2.00 shipped in debian as soon as possible. 1.99 even with lots of patches does not support raid systems well. also chainloading efi binaries does not work somehow. Forget that secure boot crap, all you need to do is to enter setup and disable it. The way Ubuntu wants to implement it you gain absolutely nothing and the Fedora way is only for oss only systems. When i use a boot loader like GRUB2 then i want to be able boot other systems as well - that means win 7/8 in uefi mode. Otherwise i can directly add kernel as well with efibootmgr. Then i at least skip one bootloader.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by mark45 View Post
                    Sure, except THE LINUX DISTRO (and probably others will follow) won't use it by default on UEFI boxes:
                    Except that they still use it by default once you disable secure boot. And it's not UEFI, it's Secure Boot. There are plenty of UEFI boards right now, too.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
                      Except that they still use it by default once you disable secure boot. And it's not UEFI, it's Secure Boot. There are plenty of UEFI boards right now, too.
                      For non geeks it's quite a hassle since they don't even know what a BIOS is, not to mention that on some systems (at least ARM ones) you won't even be able to disable it, thanks to our friends from M$.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Secure boot is a bad feature because don t have a exception system .A security standard cannot do this.
                        Even Browsers create exceptions when the site does not have a certificate.
                        Microsoft is using to restrict everything.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by mark45 View Post
                          For non geeks it's quite a hassle since they don't even know what a BIOS is, not to mention that on some systems (at least ARM ones) you won't even be able to disable it, thanks to our friends from M$.
                          Sure, but that in no way renders GRUB2 dead. Last time I checked, most Linux users were either tech savvy or corporations with paid support.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
                            Sure, but that in no way renders GRUB2 dead. Last time I checked, most Linux users were either tech savvy or corporations with paid support.
                            And Microsoft makes now with that and 1000 other small stiches shure that it stays that way... and even right now I think thats not really true... but on the other hand what is a tech savy, you could say that to anybody who still buys a pc instead of a konsole ^^.

                            you could say something like that about the microsoft ooxml too. you dont have to use it, you have a standard so you can force people to take it... because its (the) standard... forget about it, now nobody sends per email a odf file, even if you want that the other guy can edit it...

                            so when now microsoft signes his shit with very long time taking... you get new features or bugfixes very slow for this alternative bootloader... and even the resource wasted to create it again makes this guy not develop something other that could help linux... its no extremely big deal, right now... but think about it... what are the hyped pcs right now... yes tablets... what do they use arm cpus nearly exclusive... so this crap-secureshit sucks...

                            And amd thinks about building arm pcs and nvidia does... I saw from the data very impressive systems with arm cpus if that keeps going this way we could see in a few years a complete switch in private pcs to arm systems...

                            there was that notebook or netbook that worked 24hours and could play 1080p videos with gpu-encoding even that very long... so I dont like it because there are no 3d-drivers for this things or drivers that use this hardware-encoders I guess... so I dont want it to happen... but I think that that could kill x86 for the desktop/mobile... except for gaming and even there if you think about android... then you have this secure boot enabled and unable to shut it down in 99% of the pcs in the wild... that will be a fun...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Sure, but that really has nothing to do with the release of GRUB2.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X