On 14/07/2023 19:11, Mike Gilbert wrote:
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 5:07 AM Sam James <s...@gentoo.org> wrote:
Andrew Ammerlaan <andrewammerl...@gentoo.org> writes:
Hi all,
Currently we have 7 packages defining the efi flag and an additional 2
defining the uefi flag. These flags do the same thing, add support for
(U)EFI booting. I therefore propose we introduce efi as a new global
flag and later rename the uefi flag to efi in sys-apps/fwupd and
sys-apps/ipmicfg.
I don't have a strong preference between the efi or uefi flags, but
since a majority of the packages has chosen efi I suggest we go with
that.
Let's do USE=uefi please - UEFI is the modern name for it, and EFI is
legacy. I'd like to avoid another USE=ssl situation (where we're
stuck with it forever given we have no mechanism for USE flag renames,
despite the fact that it's really TLS now).
Any thoughts on grub_platforms_efi-32 and grub_platforms_efi-64?
If we want to rename USE flags, I would probably take the opportunity
to eliminate the GRUB_PLATFORMS USE_EXPAND altogether.
For grub specifically there is another thing to consider. Currently
emerging grub does not actually build an efi executable, this (I think)
is done when you 'grub-install'. This is unfortunate because that makes
it the only bootloader that you can't conveniently sign with
secureboot.eclass.
I briefly looked into the problem and there is 'grub-mkstandalone' which
could be used to generate (and then sign) a grub efi executable. But how
this would then work with 'grub-install' I do not know. I don't use grub
myself, but maybe someone who does can look into this.
Best regards,
Andrew
