On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 11:50 AM Jared Dominguez
<jaredz(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 8:20 AM Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 8:04 AM Vít Ondruch <vondruch(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Dne 05. 04. 22 v 17:08 Neal Gompa napsal(a):
>> > > On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 10:54 AM Ben Cotton <bcotton(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>> > >>
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DeprecateLegacyBIOS
>> > >>
>> > >> == Summary ==
>> > >> Make UEFI a hardware requirement for new Fedora installations on
>> > >> platforms that support it (x86_64). Legacy BIOS support is not
>> > >> removed, but new non-UEFI installation is not supported on those
>> > >> platforms. This is a first step toward eventually removing
legacy
>> > >> BIOS support entirely.
>> > >>
>> > >> == Owner ==
>> > >> * Name: [[User:rharwood| Robbie Harwood]], [[User:jkonecny| Jiří
>> > >> Konečný]], [[User:bcl| Brian C. Lane]]
>> > >> * Email: rharwood(a)redhat.com
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> == Detailed Description ==
>> > >> UEFI is defined by a versioned standard that can be tested and
>> > >> certified against. By contrast, every legacy BIOS is unique.
Legacy
>> > >> BIOS is widely considered deprecated (Intel, AMD, Microsoft,
Apple)
>> > >> and on its way out. As it ages, maintainability has decreased,
and
>> > >> the status quo of maintaining both stacks in perpetuity is not
viable
>> > >> for those currently doing that work.
>> > >>
>> > >> It is inevitable that legacy BIOS will be removed in a future
release.
>> > >> To ease this transition as best we can, there will be a period (of
at
>> > >> least one Fedora release) where it will be possible to boot using
the
>> > >> legacy BIOS codepaths, but new installations will not be
possible.
>> > >> While it would be easier for us to cut support off today, our hope
is
>> > >> that this compromise position will make for a smoother
transition.
>> > >> Additional support with issues during the transition would be
>> > >> appreciated.
>> > >>
>> > >> While this will eventually reduce workload for boot/installation
>> > >> components (grub2 reduces surface area, syslinux goes away
entirely,
>> > >> anaconda reduces surface area), the reduction in support burden
>> > >> extends much further into the stack - for instance, VESA support
can
>> > >> be removed from the distro.
>> > >>
>> > >> Fedora already requires a 2GHz dual core CPU at minimum (and
therefore
>> > >> mandates that machines must have been made after 2006). Like the
>> > >> already accepted Fedora 37 change to retire ARMv7 support, the
>> > >> hardware targeted tends to be rather underpowered by today’s
>> > >> standards, and the world has moved on from it. Intel stopped
shipping
>> > >> the last vestiges of BIOS support in 2020 (as have other vendors,
and
>> > >> Apple and Microsoft), so this is clearly the way things are
heading -
>> > >> and therefore aligns with Fedora’s “First” objective.
>> > >>
>> > >> == Feedback ==
>> > >> Dropping legacy BIOS was previously discussed (but not proposed)
in 2020:
>> > >>
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel%40lists.fedoraproject...
>> > >>
>> > >> Important, relevant points from that thread (yes, I reread the
entire
>> > >> thread) that have informed this change:
>> > >>
>> > >> * Some machines are BIOS-only. This change does not prevent their
use
>> > >> yet, but they are effectively deprecated. grub2 (our default
>> > >> bootloader) is already capable of both BIOS and UEFI booting.
>> > >> * Drawing a clear year cutoff, let alone a detailed list of
hardware
>> > >> this change affects, is basically impossible. This is unfortunate
but
>> > >> unlikely to ever change.
>> > >> * There is no migration story from Legacy BIOS to UEFI -
>> > >> repartitioning effectively mandates a reinstall. As a result, we
>> > >> don’t drop support for existing Legacy BIOS systems yet, just new
>> > >> installations.
>> > >> * There is no way to deprecate hardware without causing some
amount of friction.
>> > >> * While at the time AWS did not support UEFI booting, that is no
>> > >> longer the case and they support UEFI today.
>> > >>
>> > >> == Benefit to Fedora ==
>> > >> UEFI is required for many desirable features, including applying
>> > >> firmware updates (fwupd) and supporting SecureBoot. As a
standalone
>> > >> change, it reduces support burden on everything involved in
installing
>> > >> Fedora, since there becomes only one way to do it per platform.
>> > >> Finally, it simplifies our install/live media, since it too only
has
>> > >> to boot one way per arch. Freedom Friends Features First - this
is
>> > >> that last one.
>> > >>
>> > >> == Scope ==
>> > >> * Proposal owners:
>> > >> ** bootloaders: No change (existing Legacy BIOS installations
still supported).
>> > >> ** anaconda: No change (there could be only optional cleanups in
the
>> > >> code). However, it needs to be verified.
>> > >> ** Lorax: Code has already been written:
>> > >>
https://github.com/weldr/lorax/pull/1205
>> > >>
>> > > This pull request primarily drops legacy BIOS support by dropping
>> > > syslinux/isolinux. We don't necessarily have to drop legacy BIOS
>> > > support there if we reuse GRUB there too. Other distributions
>> > > (openSUSE and Mageia, notably) both use GRUB for both BIOS and UEFI
on
>> > > live media.
>> > >
>> > >> * Other developers:
>> > >> ** libvirt: UEFI works today, but is not the default. UEFI-only
>> > >> installation is needed for Windows 11, and per conversations,
libvirt
>> > >> is prepared for this change.
>> > >> ** Virtualbox: UEFI Fedora installs are working and per
virtualbox
>> > >> team, UEFI will be/is the default in 7.0+.
>> > >> ** The Hardware Overview page should be updated to mention the
UEFI
>> > >> requirement:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/rawhide/release-notes/welcome...
>> > >>
>> > >> * Release engineering: [
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10738
#Releng
>> > >> issue 10738]
>> > >>
>> > >> * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
>> > >>
>> > >> * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
>> > >>
>> > >> * Alignment with Objectives: N/A
>> > >>
>> > >> == Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
>> > >> Systems currently using Legacy BIOS for booting on x86_64 will
>> > >> continue to do so.
>> > >>
>> > >> However, this modifies the baseline Fedora requirements and some
>> > >> hardware will no longer be supported for new installations.
>> > >>
>> > >> == How To Test ==
>> > >> UEFI installation has been supported for quite a while already,
so
>> > >> additional testing there should not be required.
>> > >>
>> > >> == User Experience ==
>> > >> Installs will continue to work on UEFI, and will not work on
Legacy
>> > >> BIOS. Our install media is already UEFI-capable.
>> > >>
>> > >> == Dependencies ==
>> > >> None
>> > >>
>> > >> == Contingency Plan ==
>> > >> Leave things as they are. Code continues to rot. Community
>> > >> assistance is required to continue the status quo. Current
owners
>> > >> plan to orphan some packages regardless of whether the proposal
is
>> > >> accepted.
>> > >>
>> > >> Another fallback option could be, if a Legacy BIOS SIG organizes,
to
>> > >> donate the relevant packages there and provide some initial
mentoring.
>> > >> Longer term, packages that cannot be wholly donated could be
split,
>> > >> though it is unclear whether the synchronization thereby required
>> > >> would reduce the work for anyone.
>> > >>
>> > >> * Contingency mechanism: Delay until next release.
>> > >> * Contingency deadline: Beta freeze
>> > >> * Blocks release? No
>> > >>
>> > >> == Documentation ==
>> > >> See release notes.
>> > >>
>> > >> == Release Notes ==
>> > >> Fedora 37 marks legacy BIOS installation as deprecated on x86_64
in
>> > >> favor of UEFI. While systems already using Legacy BIOS to boot
are
>> > >> still supported, new legacy BIOS installations on these
architectures
>> > >> are no longer possible. Legacy BIOS support will be removed
entirely
>> > >> in a future Fedora.
>> > >>
>> > >> (Additionally, the Hardware Overview page should be updated to
mention
>> > >> the UEFI requirement.)
>> > >>
>> > > While I'm sympathetic to this Change, I think this is way too
early to
>> > > do across the board. UEFI came onto the scene in the PC space in
>> > > 2011~2012 with Windows 8, and even to this day, there are
sufficiently
>> > > buggy hardware platforms that Linux does not boot in UEFI mode:
>> > >
https://twitter.com/VKCsh/status/1511132132885815307
>> > >
>> > > I even have one such machine, an HP desktop machine that came with
>> > > Windows 8. My current desktop PC has problems booting Linux UEFI as
>> > > well, though I've done "clever" things to work around
that. I don't
>> > > expect most users to be able to deal with that. Server platforms were
>> > > *worse* as they were slower to offer UEFI. The first time I was able
>> > > to get a server with UEFI was in 2014.
>> >
>> >
>> > Maybe I don't correctly understand the "Legacy BIOS support is
not
>> > removed, but new non-UEFI installation is not supported on those
>> > platforms." quoted from the the change description, but if you have
your
>> > system installed, it should keep working. You just keep updating. IOW as
>> > long as you don't reinstall the system, you are fine and you don't
have
>> > to be concerned.
>> >
>> > If you really have a need to reinstall such machine, you'll take the
F36
>> > image and upgrade to F37+ and you should still be good.
>> >
>>
>> This is not a deprecation change, this is effectively a removal
>> change. By removing the packages and the tooling support for legacy
>> BIOS, it makes several scenarios (including recovery) harder.
>> Moreover, it puts the burden on people to figure out if their hardware
>> can boot and install Fedora when we clearly haven't reached a critical
>> mass yet for doing so, like we did when we finally removed the i686
>> kernel build.
>>
>> I'm personally a fan of using UEFI instead of BIOS. Heck, I
>> implemented support for UEFI in Fedora's cloud images when other
>> people told me it was not possible, while preserving BIOS support.
>> I've been trying to figure out the roadmap for BIOS deprecation for a
>> year now, and the reason *I* didn't propose a Change yet is because I
>> have not sufficiently determined that it was reasonable to do so.
>>
>> I'm particularly upset about this Change because it feels like a
>> hostage change where the proposal owners blithely ignore what we're
>> saying as unimportant or irrelevant and abuse our principles to do
>> things that are clearly against what the community feels is right.
>
>
> This strikes me as a very negative view of what we're trying to do. We're
trying to figure out a timeline for deprecation and openly discuss, which is why this
change proposal is here now. Support for legacy x86 boot is rapidly vanishing across the
industry. Code is rotting in Fedora. The Red Hat team doing the work in the bootloader
space doesn't have capacity for continuing support for legacy x86 boot anyway.
We're attempting to communicate boundaries and available commitment and work in the
community on a workable plan. This proposal includes a call for community assistance if
there's sufficient desire to maintain the status quo longer. You are welcome to
constructively help with that. Hearing accusations of folks, who are operating on good
faith, engaging in "abuse" and executing a "hostage change" feels
concerning to me.
>
>> I have been trying in the background for years to try to figure out
>> solutions for usability problems in Fedora Linux on UEFI because *I
>> want our experience to be good there*. But it's extremely hard when:
>>
>> 1. Bugs and feature requests around UEFI related features are ignored
>
>
> Per my reply to you yesterday, I would be grateful if you would list out examples
here. This is the second time I've heard this, and it's not concrete enough for a
constructive conversation on that topic.
>
This comes from years of trying to engage on improving the UEFI
situation in Fedora. To be perfectly clear: I don't want to maintain
the status quo. The status quo sucks.
The status quo is:
* UEFI is where everything is going in hardware
* Linux UEFI is a second-class experience to legacy boot
* No interest in making the UEFI-based environments better for users
We have a ton of nice things in UEFI environments when they work, as
long as we don't step out of the happy path. However, the majority of
Linux PC users *must* step out of the happy path to get their hardware
working for two cases:
* NVIDIA graphics
* Broadcom wireless
This was already addressed. Fedora should not be expected to jump through
hoops to support vendors unwilling to participate in the open source Linux
ecosystem. Users should stop buying their hardware -or- contribute to
projects like nouveau to make this a non-issue.
The former case is excessively common, and the latter case is fairly
common with HP and Dell machines as well as some smaller OEMs. I
literally helped someone this past week with both[1][2][3]. The
Workstation WG has been tracking both issues for years now[4][5]. This
situation is *worse* now because we have Fedora Linux preloaded on
computers, and OEMs basically have to disable Secure Boot to make
things "work". How's that for improving security?
To add more anecdotes... it has been years since I have had to disable Secure
Boot on a new laptop in order to install Fedora. Maybe I'm lucky, but I will
say that the experience has only improved over time and you can't really say
that for all distributions. Step 0 for many of them is still to disable
Secure Boot first then begin installation.
--
David Cantrell <dcantrell(a)redhat.com>
Red Hat, Inc. | Boston, MA | EST5EDT