[Mageia-dev] Mageia 3 feature proposals review

Wed Jun 27 08:35:35 CEST 2012

Op dinsdag 26 juni 2012 22:43:44 schreef Olav Vitters:
+> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 08:59:43PM -0400, David Walser wrote:
+> > > Fedora plans are here:
+> > > http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/12368.html?style=light
+> > > 
+> > > Ubuntu plans are here:
+> > > https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2012-June/035445.html
+> > 
+> > Interesting.  So the main reason people have complained about us not
+> > using GRUB2 is poor interaction when trying to dual boot with other
+> > distros that do use it, namely Ubuntu.  If Ubuntu isn't going to use
+> > it by default, is it really mandatory that we switch to it?
+> 
+> You cannot use the Ubuntu method, they plan their Ubuntu-only
+> certificate.
+> 
+> Fedora way is by using Grub 2 and having a small boot bit which is
+> certified.
+> 
+> So Grub2 seems the way to go.
+
+I thought they were planning on signing all the stuff after grub2 as well?
+
+I have no trouble having signed bootloader. but i would prefer it to be from a 
+completely free CA. ie: NOT from microsoft.
+
+above signing from microsoft, I would even prefer to have a documentation that 
+requests to disable Secure Boot, then generate your own key and adding that, 
+and then setting up Secure Boot again, with your own personal signed stuff.
+
+of course, if there was an independant org that had it's CA in all hardware, 
+and signed all free OSes, that would be alot better.
+