This bug was fixed in the package grub2-signed - 1.9~ubuntu12.04.4
---
grub2-signed (1.9~ubuntu12.04.4) precise-proposed; urgency=low
* Rebuild against grub-efi-amd64 1.99-21ubuntu3.10. (LP: #1184297)
-- Stephane GraberFri, 19 Jul 2013 20:03:16 -0400
** Changed in: ubiquity (U
This bug was fixed in the package grub-installer - 1.68ubuntu5.2
---
grub-installer (1.68ubuntu5.2) precise-proposed; urgency=low
* Always use grub-efi-amd64-signed on 64bit UEFI systems instead of
relying on SecureBoot detection. (LP: #1184297)
-- Stephane GraberFri, 19 Ju
This bug was fixed in the package base-installer - 1.122ubuntu7.3
---
base-installer (1.122ubuntu7.3) precise-proposed; urgency=low
* Install the signed kernels on any 64bit UEFI machine. (LP: #1184297)
-- Stephane GraberFri, 19 Jul 2013 14:10:26 -0400
** Changed in: base-inst
This bug was fixed in the package ubiquity - 2.10.26
---
ubiquity (2.10.26) precise-proposed; urgency=low
* Automatic update of included source packages: base-installer
1.122ubuntu7.3, grub-installer 1.68ubuntu5.2. (LP: #1184297)
* Install the shim and signed grub and kernels
This bug was fixed in the package grub2 - 1.99-21ubuntu3.10
---
grub2 (1.99-21ubuntu3.10) precise-proposed; urgency=low
* Add ubuntu_shim_by_default.patch that makes any EFI system boot into
the shim (if installed) even if SecureBoot is disabled. (LP: #1184297)
-- Stephane Grab
Tested this in OVMF, confirmed that the old precise image wouldn't install the
signed packages and would boot an unsigned grub.
The new image (latest daily using proposed) now installs all the signed file
and boots through shimx64.
The only difference I noticed is 5 efi disk errors when booting
Hello Petter, or anyone else affected,
Accepted ubiquity into precise-proposed. The package will build now and
be available at http://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/2.10.26 in
a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wiki.u
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/precise-proposed/grub2-signed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1184297
Title:
Secure boot failed, claiming boot is against security policy
To manage notific
Hello Petter, or anyone else affected,
Accepted grub2-signed into precise-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at
http://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2-signed/1.9~ubuntu12.04.4 in a
few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package.
Hello Petter, or anyone else affected,
Accepted grub-installer into precise-proposed. The package will build
now and be available at http://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub-
installer/1.68ubuntu5.2 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by testing this new package.
** Changed in: grub2-signed (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
** Changed in: ubiquity (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.n
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/precise-proposed/base-installer
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1184297
Title:
Secure boot failed, claiming boot is against security policy
To manage notif
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/precise-proposed/grub2
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1184297
Title:
Secure boot failed, claiming boot is against security policy
To manage notifications
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/precise-proposed/grub-installer
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1184297
Title:
Secure boot failed, claiming boot is against security policy
To manage notif
Hello Petter, or anyone else affected,
Accepted grub2 into precise-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at http://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/1.99-21ubuntu3.10
in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wi
This bug was fixed in the package base-installer - 1.122ubuntu16
---
base-installer (1.122ubuntu16) saucy; urgency=low
* Install the signed kernels on any 64bit UEFI machine. (LP: #1184297)
-- Stephane GraberFri, 19 Jul 2013 11:30:15 -0400
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/saucy-pro
Hello Petter, or anyone else affected,
Accepted base-installer into precise-proposed. The package will build
now and be available at http://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-
installer/1.122ubuntu7.3 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by testing this new package.
** Description changed:
- I've struggled to install Linux on a Packard Bell EasyNote LV11HC,
- without having to accept the Windows 8 license, and my progress is
- documented in http://www.linlap.com/packard_bell_easynote_lv . Had to
- pull the hard drive and install to a USB stick to be able to
This bug was fixed in the package ubiquity - 2.15.11
---
ubiquity (2.15.11) saucy; urgency=low
* Automatic update of included source packages: base-installer
1.122ubuntu16, partman-newworld 30. (LP: #1184297)
-- Stephane GraberFri, 19 Jul 2013 13:00:57 -0400
** Changed in:
** Changed in: base-installer (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
** Changed in: grub-installer (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you
So it looks like we also need a change to base-installer if we want the
signed kernel to be installed (absolutely necessary until shim is fixed
to work with unsigned kernels on Lenovo machines).
** Also affects: base-installer (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: ub
This bug was fixed in the package ubiquity - 2.15.10
---
ubiquity (2.15.10) saucy; urgency=low
[ Kaj Ailomaa ]
* Change Ubuntu Studio background in ubiquity-dm.
[ Jeremy Bicha ]
* Don't tell automake to install everything to ubiquity-frontend-gtk and
try to clean up after
** Branch linked: lp:~xnox/ubiquity/autopilot
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1184297
Title:
Secure boot failed, claiming boot is against security policy
To manage notifications about
** Changed in: ubiquity (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
** Changed in: grub2-signed (Ubuntu Precise)
Milestone: None => ubuntu-12.04.3
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/
This bug was fixed in the package grub2-signed - 1.15
---
grub2-signed (1.15) saucy; urgency=low
* Rebuild against grub-efi-amd64 2.00-15ubuntu2. (LP: #1184297)
-- Stephane GraberThu, 18 Jul 2013 16:18:49 -0400
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
This bug was fixed in the package grub2 - 2.00-15ubuntu2
---
grub2 (2.00-15ubuntu2) saucy; urgency=low
* Add ubuntu_shim_by_default.patch that makes any EFI system boot into
the shim (if installed) even if SecureBoot is disabled. (LP: #1184297)
-- Stephane GraberThu, 18 Jul
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/saucy-proposed/grub2-signed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1184297
Title:
Secure boot failed, claiming boot is against security policy
To manage notificat
** Also affects: grub2-signed (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: grub2-signed (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Triaged
** Changed in: grub2-signed (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => High
** Changed in: grub2-signed (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Stéphane
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/grub-installer
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1184297
Title:
Secure boot failed, claiming boot is against security policy
To manage notifications about th
This bug was fixed in the package grub-installer - 1.78ubuntu8
---
grub-installer (1.78ubuntu8) saucy; urgency=low
* Always use grub-efi-amd64-signed on 64bit UEFI systems instead of
relying on SecureBoot detection. (LP: #1184297)
-- Stephane GraberThu, 18 Jul 2013 15:41:07
** Changed in: grub-installer (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1184297
** Also affects: grub2 (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: ubiquity (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: ubiquity (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Triaged
** Changed in: ubiquity (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: New => Triaged
** Cha
So after some discussion we just had with Colin and Steve, the
conclusion is that we'll change grub2 and the installer to always
install shim-signed on UEFI machines and have all machines secureboot or
not go through the shim at boot time.
That way we won't need to rely on the state of the machine
** Changed in: grub-installer (Ubuntu Precise)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Stéphane Graber (stgraber)
** Changed in: grub-installer (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Stéphane Graber (stgraber)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscr
Is there anything I can do to help debug this issue? I left the
installer to do its job automatically, and thus do not know what I could
have done differently.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net
I've reviewed the KEK and db from this system, and they appear to
contain the necessary third-party marketplace key as expected. So the
only issue I see is that the system has not been configured to use shim-
signed on installation.
** Also affects: grub-installer (Ubuntu Precise)
Importance:
Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.
** Changed in: grub-installer (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1184297
Titl
Bug #1195950 appears to be the same issue on different hardware. There
definitely seems to be an issue with installs winding up without shim-
signed installed when they need to have it.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
FYI, the contents of the SecureBoot efi variables show that SecureBoot
is not enabled on this system at the time this was run. And the
efibootmgr output shows that grub is being booted directly, not going
through shim-signed, which would not be valid if SecureBoot is enabled.
So it looks like this
[Steve Langasek]
> So http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/24869.html explains why you needed to
> pull the hard drive.
Yeah. This really suck!
> It does not explain why you would get an error about security
> policy. Can you attach the output of the following three commands
> on the affected machine:
>
So http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/24869.html explains why you needed to
pull the hard drive. It does not explain why you would get an error
about security policy. Can you attach the output of the following three
commands on the affected machine:
sudo efibootmgr -v
od -tx1
/sys/firmware/efi/efivars
After booting using F12, the machine suddenly started booting directly
from HD without any manual intervention needed. I did install scim in
the mean time, but given that scim-signed already was installed, I doubt
it had any effect on this.
--
You received this bug notification because you are
42 matches
Mail list logo
