[Mageia-dev] Mageia 3 feature proposals review

AL13N alien at rmail.be
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.

More information about the Mageia-dev mailing list