Debian Developers Discuss UEFI SecureBoot Plans

[TobiSGD]

And you will guarantee, that once all the hardware/infastructure is in place, windows 9, 10 or maybe even 11 all of a sudden will require manufactures to have that feature ON to receive the silly sticker? Can you?

Thought so.

Have I stated that? How should I guarantee that? Do you think I am Steve Ballmer? I have stated clearly that this is for the Windows 8 logo, shouldn't be hard to understand. People are spreading enough FUD about Secure Boot already, do you want to start now with spreading that about later Windows versions? You don't know what will happen then, I don't know what will happen then, so guessing around is of no use.

[oliver]

I can only say it again, on x86 hardware Microsoft is actively forcing the hardware manufacturers to not lock out other systems, if they want to get the Windows 8 logo for their hardware. Why is everyone bitching about Microsoft but no one actually reading their documentation?

And you will guarantee, that once all the hardware/infastructure is in place, windows 9, 10 or maybe even 11 all of a sudden will require manufactures to have that feature ON to receive the silly sticker? Can you?

Thought so.

[AdamW]

because the leader of the open source movement eats toe fongus. it's always easier to wage a holy war than to make a product that the masses enjoy using.

Free software and open source are not the same thing, and RMS and ESR *definitely* aren't the same person.

[not.sure]

Simply put: SecureBoot = clusterfuck.

[garegin]

because the leader of the open source movement eats toe fongus. it's always easier to wage a holy war than to make a product that the masses enjoy using.

[TobiSGD]

I can only say it again, on x86 hardware Microsoft is actively forcing the hardware manufacturers to not lock out other systems, if they want to get the Windows 8 logo for their hardware. Why is everyone bitching about Microsoft but no one actually reading their documentation?

[seraphim]

Secure boot benefits nobody

Debian hasn't stated exactly what approach they will take with the whole secure boot/UEFI mess so it's a bit silly to criticize them at this point. The whole proprietary bootloader nonsense was enforced by those pigs at Microsoft since they never want to play fairly and are scared of the rising momentum that GNU/Linux has. Tampering with the open architecure of the PC to ensure only one OS can be used is blatant anti-competitve behavior by Microsoft and I hope they suffer a nasty retaliation for the shenanigans they constantly pull.

Sure, many GNU/Linux distros can use their own bootloader key to enable alternative os installations by why should they have to jump through hoops because of one companies insistence on locking out competition ? Microsoft does not own the PC architecture and should stay the hell away from trying to make it customized to their platforms.

[garegin]

debian always chooses ideology over common sense. so it is no wonder that they'll have the most awkward solution for secureboot.

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Debian Developers Discuss UEFI SecureBoot Plans

Debian developers today at DebConf 12, aside from talking about the future Debian codename, discussed what to do about UEFI booting for Debian Linux...

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