UEFI Frustration

Head_on_a_Stick · 2015-11-08 18:36:04

hhh wrote:

@HoaS, I wasn't aware of the licensing issue, but what did you mean by EFI never being supported in Debian? It's currently supported (isn't it?), just not yet by live-build, and I assume it will eventually have to be supported as BIOS gradually gets fazed out unless another boot method besides EFI comes along.

Yes, the Debian live ISO images should support UEFI soon (there are problems with xorriso, I think [1]) and the netinstall ISO images already support UEFI on 32-bit systems, 64-bit systems and even 64-bit systems with 32-bit UEFI firmware.

The licensing conflict to which I was referring was in respect of Secure Boot.

Check the link in my signature for a very easily-implemented solution to Secure Boot.

[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugrepo … bug=731709

Head_on_a_Stick · 2015-11-08 18:38:29

hhh wrote:

If you look at the Wiki page I linked, supporting both BIOS and EFI boot methods on all the available hardware with their buggy implementations of EFI is VERY difficult.

My systems boot in both UEFI & non-UEFI modes

The Arch live ISO can also do this by using syslinux -- I will look into this further when I have a moment.

hhh · 2015-11-08 18:43:48

Just wanted to say how much I appreciate your help here in all things UEFI. Like I said, I have no UEFI hardware and no experience with it.

nobody0 · 2015-11-08 19:49:49

I forgot about the Debian netinstall and also forgot about this http://crunchbang.org/forums/viewtopic. … 56#p436956 then also had a look here, http://crunchbang.org/forums/viewtopic. … 75#p439675 You'd notice in the video that Systemback had added two folders, i.e, boot and EFI (between 3.08 - 3.16 mins), which are not BL RC1 iso. , So, if those folders are added to the BL iso, it might boot/installed in an UEFI system, I suppose.

spacex · 2016-01-30 01:29:14

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

Although the live ISO image is likely to gain UEFI support in future

The Official Debian live ISO's will probably get it sometime soon, trough live-wrapper. But live-build isn't being developed anymore, so live-build will not support it directly anytime soon.

I see that Debian are looking for someone to take charge of developing live-build, but until then, we will probably have to first build the ISO's and then hack them and add uefi-support manually. Or of course, hack live-build directly. But me for one are waiting it out.

I know that Kali has a fork of live-build with uefi-support, at least I've heard rumours about it. Perhaps I should have a look at that. Been to lazy, as I'm able to convert to UEFI postinstall myself. But for those with pc's without legacy support, that isn't a solution. They have to do the netinstalls...

Perhaps HoaS could do us all a favour and take charge of live-build? Just talk to Ben Armstrong. Come on, you are more than competent. It's right up in your alley. Pleeeease. No pressure ]:D

Last edited by spacex (2016-01-30 01:30:02)

spacex · 2016-01-31 00:23:05

Well, the Kali version of live-build do create a ISO that boots in UEFI-mode. I'm trying it for TweakOS now, but there are some imperfections. Not sure if it's with the live-build version I'm trying, or if it's my build that needs some adjusting to fit this live-build version. Making the second attempt now.But I'm optimistic, as it booted in uefi-mode, and everything looked fine in partman. But I aborted because I wasn't happy with the boot splash screen, and also that the IS0 was +100MB bigger, than if I do the same build in the ordinary Debian version.Well, new ISO finished, off I go

Last edited by spacex (2016-01-31 01:45:25)

nobody0 · 2016-01-31 08:09:06

Except the 32 bit iso, the other two 64 bit isos boot in an UEFI system.

spacex · 2016-01-31 13:32:04

ostrolek wrote:

Except the 32 bit iso, the other two 64 bit isos boot in an UEFI system.

Sure, but it's good enough to get uefi-support for 64 bit as a first step, as any computer with UEFI are capable of 64-bit.If anyone needs to use 32-bit, then they probably at least have legacy support available to them in their bios. Chances are also that most of them only have legacy support and can't boot in uefi-mode anyways.

Sure, there probably are user cases where uefi for 32-bit are wished for, but it can't be all that many cases.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2016-01-31 13:36:17

Just to note: the Debian netinstall ISO images do support 32-bit, 64-bit and mixed bitness UEFI systems

spacex · 2016-01-31 17:19:01

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

Just to note: the Debian netinstall ISO images do support 32-bit, 64-bit and mixed bitness UEFI systems

Yes, but now we're talking about live-images, which serves a purpose which the netinstall images do not cover. They're only usable for permanent installs

Besides, Bunsen from a netinstall image is a tedious process, only suited for the most patient users, and only for those who do it seldom, and who keep their installs for a long period of time. In other words, people who are the exact opposite of me. Any install can consider itself as lucky if I've not bored by it in a week or two

But the Kali version of live-build might be a way to get uefi-support to BunsenLabs quite soon, and I suppose that the Kali version will be maintained and developed, unlike the Debian version which has been somewhat abandoned, without anyone new taking charge of it yet.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2016-01-31 17:46:27

spacex wrote:

But the Kali version of live-build might be a way to get uefi-support to BunsenLabs quite soon

I had a look at it this afternoon and the live-build script they use relies on the Kali repositories.

As these are based on Debian testing, it would be unwise to use them for BunsenLabs, IMO.

I think we will be waiting for an upstream solution as we are trying to stick as close to Debian stable as possible.

At any rate, UEFI support is not a priority as the distribution is intended for use on lower resource (and hence older) machines.

spacex · 2016-02-01 01:01:32

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

spacex wrote:
But the Kali version of live-build might be a way to get uefi-support to BunsenLabs quite soon
I had a look at it this afternoon and the live-build script they use relies on the Kali repositories.
As these are based on Debian testing, it would be unwise to use them for BunsenLabs, IMO.
I think we will be waiting for an upstream solution as we are trying to stick as close to Debian stable as possible.
At any rate, UEFI support is not a priority as the distribution is intended for use on lower resource (and hence older) machines.

Ok. I'm not going to wait for a upstream solution, as it is a testing image I want to create anyways, and off course. Just to do it. So that I can have it as a secondary solution for the next release, if there isn't a upstream solution in time for the launch of Strecth.

Anyways, they are doing some work here:
https://debian-live.alioth.debian.org/.

#21 2015-11-08 18:36:04

Re: UEFI Frustration

#22 2015-11-08 18:38:29

Re: UEFI Frustration

#23 2015-11-08 18:43:48

Re: UEFI Frustration

#24 2015-11-08 19:49:49

Re: UEFI Frustration

#25 2016-01-30 01:29:14

Re: UEFI Frustration

#26 2016-01-31 00:23:05

Re: UEFI Frustration

#27 2016-01-31 08:09:06

Re: UEFI Frustration

#28 2016-01-31 13:32:04

Re: UEFI Frustration

#29 2016-01-31 13:36:17

Re: UEFI Frustration

#30 2016-01-31 17:19:01

Re: UEFI Frustration

#31 2016-01-31 17:46:27

Re: UEFI Frustration

#32 2016-02-01 01:01:32

Re: UEFI Frustration

Board footer