Igor Raits <ignatenkobrain(a)fedoraproject.org> writes:
On Tue, 2020-06-30 at 13:34 +0000, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
> Given Hans proposal  introduced systemd/grub2/Gnome upstream
> changes it beg the question if now would not be the time to stop
> supporting booting in legacy bios mode and move to uefi only
> supported boot which has been available on any common intel based x86
> platform since atleast 2005.
> Now in 2017 Intel's technical marketing engineer Brian Richardson
> revealed in a presentation that the company will require UEFI Class 3
> and above as in it would remove legacy BIOS support from its client
> and datacenter platforms by 2020 and one might expect AMD to follow
> Intel in this regard.
> So Intel platforms produced this year presumably will be unable
> to run 32-bit operating systems, unable to use related software (at
> least natively), and unable to use older hardware, such as RAID HBAs
> (and therefore older hard drives that are connected to those HBAs),
> network cards, and even graphics cards that lack UEFI-compatible
> vBIOS (launched before 2012 – 2013) etc.
> This post is just to gather feed back why Fedora should still
> continue to support legacy BIOS boot as opposed to stop supporting it
> and potentially drop grub2 and use sd-boot instead.
> Share your thoughts and comments on how such move might affect you so
> feedback can be collected for the future on why such a change might
> be bad, how it might affect the distribution and scope of such change
> can be determined for potential system wide proposal.
I think there are many people still install OS in the legacy mode, but
I don't really have numbers. One thing we should definitely do if we
deprecate legacy BIOS is to properly warn users that still use this
configuration, develop tooling for them if possible for migration and
do not allow upgrades that will simply break their system.
I think this is the only path forward that can actually work. Without
tooling, the only real way to "migrate" from legacy to UEFI is to
reinstall the operating system - much love to anaconda, but that's not
reasonable as a migration path.
Consider the partitioning. A fairly reasonable legacy setup looks like:
\-> / (FS root)
\-> other partitions if you like to live dangerously
UEFI needs different partitions at the top level, with different size
requirements. So, since we've partitioned the entire disk, that
dm_crypt area needs to shrink... which means the LVM needs to
shrink... which means we need to shrink the filesystems in it. I'm sure
there are people who feel comfortable enough with parted and whatnot to
accomplish this, but I sure don't.
So I like UEFI, but the risk of rendering my systems unbootable by doing
this by hand is too high.
1: The fact that no one agrees on the size of anything doesn't help,
either. 10^2 vs. 2^10, bits vs. bytes, sector and block
sizing... this is begging for a nice UI.