I've found 6 web sites so far that had instructions on setting up a UEFI USB flash to boot, but all have failed. Some actually create a UEFI Flash that my test usb is seen as being a UEFI flash, but the boot fails?
The last one I fully documented the steps from page, but the resulting flash doesn't even show up as an UEFI Flash. Probable due to the failure of the grub2-install option?? grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot.
So, it seems it worked on some system before, but fails with Fedora 33 at least?? Don't want to create a UEFI Secure Boot, but just a UEFI Boot??
#https://linuxconfig.org/how-to-create-multiboot-usb-with-linux parted -s /dev/sdb mklabel msdos parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary 1MiB 551Mib parted -s /dev/sdb set 1 esp on parted -s /dev/sdb set 1 boot on mkfs.fat -F32 /dev/sdb1 parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary 551Mib 100% mkfs.ext4 /dev/sdb2 mkdir /media/{efi,data} mount /dev/sdb1 /media/efi mount /dev/sdb2 /media/data # Installing legacy grub2 grub2-install \ --target=i386-pc \ --recheck \ --boot-directory="/media/data/boot" /dev/sdb
# Installing grub for efi grub2-install \ --target=x86_64-efi \ --recheck \ --force \ --removable \ --efi-directory="/media/efi" \ --boot-directory="/media/data/boot" ## grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot. mkdir /media/data/boot/iso chown 1000:1000 /media/data/boot/iso cd /media/data/boot/iso/ cp /home/msetzerii/g4l0.60alpha/g4l-v0.60.iso . cd /media/data/boot/grub2 #create grub.cfg with these lines. #menuentry "G4L" { # isofile="/boot/iso/g4l-v0.60.iso" # loopback loop "${isofile}" # linux (loop)/isolinux/bz5x13.14 iso-scan/filename="${isofile}" root=/dev/ram0 # initrd (loop)/isolinux/ramdisk.lzma #}
Have just got had email chat with Clonezilla developer to see what they have done. Seems they gave up on trying to make a UEFI boot, and have created a live-cd boot of a distro to get around issue.
Seems going from boot loaders link syslinux, grub4dos, and regular grub2 with a 10M kernel and 30M ramdisk. With Fedora, it would require the 2G live CD image, and then the downloading of a number of packages that are not included on the live-cd. So, 40M to 2000+M and a bunch of steps.
Does anyone know of a process to make a UEFI USB Boot that actual works using Fedora??
Very Frustrated...
And you've ensured that UEFI has been turned off in the BIOS?...what about switching from Compatibility to "ACHI"?....I've noticed that sometimes? that simple switch can work wonders....just a suggestion.
Cheers
EGO II
On 9/9/21 8:04 AM, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
I've found 6 web sites so far that had instructions on setting up a UEFI USB flash to boot, but all have failed. Some actually create a UEFI Flash that my test usb is seen as being a UEFI flash, but the boot fails?
The last one I fully documented the steps from page, but the resulting flash doesn't even show up as an UEFI Flash. Probable due to the failure of the grub2-install option?? grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot.
So, it seems it worked on some system before, but fails with Fedora 33 at least?? Don't want to create a UEFI Secure Boot, but just a UEFI Boot??
#https://linuxconfig.org/how-to-create-multiboot-usb-with-linux parted -s /dev/sdb mklabel msdos parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary 1MiB 551Mib parted -s /dev/sdb set 1 esp on parted -s /dev/sdb set 1 boot on mkfs.fat -F32 /dev/sdb1 parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary 551Mib 100% mkfs.ext4 /dev/sdb2 mkdir /media/{efi,data} mount /dev/sdb1 /media/efi mount /dev/sdb2 /media/data # Installing legacy grub2 grub2-install \ --target=i386-pc \ --recheck \ --boot-directory="/media/data/boot" /dev/sdb
# Installing grub for efi grub2-install \ --target=x86_64-efi \ --recheck \ --force \ --removable \ --efi-directory="/media/efi" \ --boot-directory="/media/data/boot" ## grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot. mkdir /media/data/boot/iso chown 1000:1000 /media/data/boot/iso cd /media/data/boot/iso/ cp /home/msetzerii/g4l0.60alpha/g4l-v0.60.iso . cd /media/data/boot/grub2 #create grub.cfg with these lines. #menuentry "G4L" { # isofile="/boot/iso/g4l-v0.60.iso" # loopback loop "${isofile}" # linux (loop)/isolinux/bz5x13.14 iso-scan/filename="${isofile}" root=/dev/ram0 # initrd (loop)/isolinux/ramdisk.lzma #}
Have just got had email chat with Clonezilla developer to see what they have done. Seems they gave up on trying to make a UEFI boot, and have created a live-cd boot of a distro to get around issue.
Seems going from boot loaders link syslinux, grub4dos, and regular grub2 with a 10M kernel and 30M ramdisk. With Fedora, it would require the 2G live CD image, and then the downloading of a number of packages that are not included on the live-cd. So, 40M to 2000+M and a bunch of steps.
Does anyone know of a process to make a UEFI USB Boot that actual works using Fedora??
Very Frustrated...
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On 9 Sep 2021 at 8:21, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote:
From: "Eddie G. O'Connor Jr." eoconnor25@gmail.com Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? To: "Michael D. Setzer II via users" users@lists.fedoraproject.org Date sent: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 08:21:23 -0400 Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
And you've ensured that UEFI has been turned off in the BIOS?...what about switching from Compatibility to "ACHI"?....I've noticed that sometimes? that simple switch can work wonders....just a suggestion.
From my understanding from one of the Users. They just got 140 of these new Dell 3080 machines, and they have no options for other than UEFI boot. The 3070 versions of the machines had the option to do regular boots. Could be a more complex process to enable it, but I'm sure he tried lots of things. Got a message about Lenova doing the same, but no specifics from that user. Went to Dell site, but there site seems to have no options unless you provide a code number from an actual machine?? Right now, the user is having to physically remove drives from 3080 machine, and connect them to a 3070 machine to do image, and then can put the drive back??
Cheers
EGO II On 9/9/21 8:04 AM, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote: I've found 6 web sites so far that had instructions on setting up a UEFI USB flash to boot, but all have failed. Some actually create a UEFI Flash that my test usb is seen as being a UEFI flash, but the boot fails?
The last one I fully documented the steps from page, but the resulting flash doesn't even show up as an UEFI Flash. Probable due to the failure of the grub2-install option?? grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot. So, it seems it worked on some system before, but fails with Fedora 33 at least?? Don't want to create a UEFI Secure Boot, but just a UEFI Boot?? #https://linuxconfig.org/how-to-create-multiboot-usb-with-linux parted -s /dev/sdb mklabel msdos parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary 1MiB 551Mib parted -s /dev/sdb set 1 esp on parted -s /dev/sdb set 1 boot on mkfs.fat -F32 /dev/sdb1 parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary 551Mib 100% mkfs.ext4 /dev/sdb2 mkdir /media/{efi,data} mount /dev/sdb1 /media/efi mount /dev/sdb2 /media/data # Installing legacy grub2 grub2-install \ --target=i386-pc \ --recheck \ --boot-directory="/media/data/boot" /dev/sdb # Installing grub for efi grub2-install \ --target=x86_64-efi \ --recheck \ --force \ --removable \ --efi-directory="/media/efi" \ --boot-directory="/media/data/boot" ## grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot. mkdir /media/data/boot/iso chown 1000:1000 /media/data/boot/iso cd /media/data/boot/iso/ cp /home/msetzerii/g4l0.60alpha/g4l-v0.60.iso . cd /media/data/boot/grub2 #create grub.cfg with these lines. #menuentry "G4L" { # isofile="/boot/iso/g4l-v0.60.iso" # loopback loop "${isofile}" # linux (loop)/isolinux/bz5x13.14 iso-scan/filename="${isofile}" root=/dev/ram0 # initrd (loop)/isolinux/ramdisk.lzma #} Have just got had email chat with Clonezilla developer to see what they have done. Seems they gave up on trying to make a UEFI boot, and have created a live-cd boot of a distro to get around issue. Seems going from boot loaders link syslinux, grub4dos, and regular grub2 with a 10M kernel and 30M ramdisk. With Fedora, it would require the 2G live CD image, and then the downloading of a number of packages that are not included on the live-cd. So, 40M to 2000+M and a bunch of steps. Does anyone know of a process to make a UEFI USB Boot that actual works using Fedora?? Very Frustrated... _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
I couldn't remember which key it was...so I found this...maybe one of these might help?...
https://www.4winkey.com/windows-tips/how-to-access-enter-bios-on-dell.html
EGO II
On 9/9/21 8:35 AM, Michael D. Setzer II wrote:
On 9 Sep 2021 at 8:21, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote:
From: "Eddie G. O'Connor Jr." eoconnor25@gmail.com Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? To: "Michael D. Setzer II via users" users@lists.fedoraproject.org Date sent: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 08:21:23 -0400 Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
And you've ensured that UEFI has been turned off in the BIOS?...what about switching from Compatibility to "ACHI"?....I've noticed that sometimes? that simple switch can work wonders....just a suggestion.
From my understanding from one of the Users. They just got 140 of these new Dell 3080 machines, and they have no options for other than UEFI boot. The 3070 versions of the machines had the option to do regular boots. Could be a more complex process to enable it, but I'm sure he tried lots of things. Got a message about Lenova doing the same, but no specifics from that user. Went to Dell site, but there site seems to have no options unless you provide a code number from an actual machine?? Right now, the user is having to physically remove drives from 3080 machine, and connect them to a 3070 machine to do image, and then can put the drive back??
Cheers
EGO II On 9/9/21 8:04 AM, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote: I've found 6 web sites so far that had instructions on setting up a UEFI USB flash to boot, but all have failed. Some actually create a UEFI Flash that my test usb is seen as being a UEFI flash, but the boot fails?
The last one I fully documented the steps from page, but the resulting flash doesn't even show up as an UEFI Flash. Probable due to the failure of the grub2-install option?? grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot. So, it seems it worked on some system before, but fails with Fedora 33 at least?? Don't want to create a UEFI Secure Boot, but just a UEFI Boot?? #https://linuxconfig.org/how-to-create-multiboot-usb-with-linux parted -s /dev/sdb mklabel msdos parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary 1MiB 551Mib parted -s /dev/sdb set 1 esp on parted -s /dev/sdb set 1 boot on mkfs.fat -F32 /dev/sdb1 parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary 551Mib 100% mkfs.ext4 /dev/sdb2 mkdir /media/{efi,data} mount /dev/sdb1 /media/efi mount /dev/sdb2 /media/data # Installing legacy grub2 grub2-install \ --target=i386-pc \ --recheck \ --boot-directory="/media/data/boot" /dev/sdb # Installing grub for efi grub2-install \ --target=x86_64-efi \ --recheck \ --force \ --removable \ --efi-directory="/media/efi" \ --boot-directory="/media/data/boot" ## grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot. mkdir /media/data/boot/iso chown 1000:1000 /media/data/boot/iso cd /media/data/boot/iso/ cp /home/msetzerii/g4l0.60alpha/g4l-v0.60.iso . cd /media/data/boot/grub2 #create grub.cfg with these lines. #menuentry "G4L" { # isofile="/boot/iso/g4l-v0.60.iso" # loopback loop "${isofile}" # linux (loop)/isolinux/bz5x13.14 iso-scan/filename="${isofile}" root=/dev/ram0 # initrd (loop)/isolinux/ramdisk.lzma #} Have just got had email chat with Clonezilla developer to see what they have done. Seems they gave up on trying to make a UEFI boot, and have created a live-cd boot of a distro to get around issue. Seems going from boot loaders link syslinux, grub4dos, and regular grub2 with a 10M kernel and 30M ramdisk. With Fedora, it would require the 2G live CD image, and then the downloading of a number of packages that are not included on the live-cd. So, 40M to 2000+M and a bunch of steps. Does anyone know of a process to make a UEFI USB Boot that actual works using Fedora?? Very Frustrated... _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
And another one....dunno if these are helpful......but here.
https://www.dell.com/support/kbdoc/en-us/000126121/access-uefi-bios-system-s...
https://www.iseepassword.com/access-bios-on-dell-computer.html
EGO II
On 9/9/21 8:35 AM, Michael D. Setzer II wrote:
On 9 Sep 2021 at 8:21, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote:
From: "Eddie G. O'Connor Jr." eoconnor25@gmail.com Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? To: "Michael D. Setzer II via users" users@lists.fedoraproject.org Date sent: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 08:21:23 -0400 Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
And you've ensured that UEFI has been turned off in the BIOS?...what about switching from Compatibility to "ACHI"?....I've noticed that sometimes? that simple switch can work wonders....just a suggestion.
From my understanding from one of the Users. They just got 140 of these new Dell 3080 machines, and they have no options for other than UEFI boot. The 3070 versions of the machines had the option to do regular boots. Could be a more complex process to enable it, but I'm sure he tried lots of things. Got a message about Lenova doing the same, but no specifics from that user. Went to Dell site, but there site seems to have no options unless you provide a code number from an actual machine?? Right now, the user is having to physically remove drives from 3080 machine, and connect them to a 3070 machine to do image, and then can put the drive back??
Cheers
EGO II On 9/9/21 8:04 AM, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote: I've found 6 web sites so far that had instructions on setting up a UEFI USB flash to boot, but all have failed. Some actually create a UEFI Flash that my test usb is seen as being a UEFI flash, but the boot fails?
The last one I fully documented the steps from page, but the resulting flash doesn't even show up as an UEFI Flash. Probable due to the failure of the grub2-install option?? grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot. So, it seems it worked on some system before, but fails with Fedora 33 at least?? Don't want to create a UEFI Secure Boot, but just a UEFI Boot?? #https://linuxconfig.org/how-to-create-multiboot-usb-with-linux parted -s /dev/sdb mklabel msdos parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary 1MiB 551Mib parted -s /dev/sdb set 1 esp on parted -s /dev/sdb set 1 boot on mkfs.fat -F32 /dev/sdb1 parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary 551Mib 100% mkfs.ext4 /dev/sdb2 mkdir /media/{efi,data} mount /dev/sdb1 /media/efi mount /dev/sdb2 /media/data # Installing legacy grub2 grub2-install \ --target=i386-pc \ --recheck \ --boot-directory="/media/data/boot" /dev/sdb # Installing grub for efi grub2-install \ --target=x86_64-efi \ --recheck \ --force \ --removable \ --efi-directory="/media/efi" \ --boot-directory="/media/data/boot" ## grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot. mkdir /media/data/boot/iso chown 1000:1000 /media/data/boot/iso cd /media/data/boot/iso/ cp /home/msetzerii/g4l0.60alpha/g4l-v0.60.iso . cd /media/data/boot/grub2 #create grub.cfg with these lines. #menuentry "G4L" { # isofile="/boot/iso/g4l-v0.60.iso" # loopback loop "${isofile}" # linux (loop)/isolinux/bz5x13.14 iso-scan/filename="${isofile}" root=/dev/ram0 # initrd (loop)/isolinux/ramdisk.lzma #} Have just got had email chat with Clonezilla developer to see what they have done. Seems they gave up on trying to make a UEFI boot, and have created a live-cd boot of a distro to get around issue. Seems going from boot loaders link syslinux, grub4dos, and regular grub2 with a 10M kernel and 30M ramdisk. With Fedora, it would require the 2G live CD image, and then the downloading of a number of packages that are not included on the live-cd. So, 40M to 2000+M and a bunch of steps. Does anyone know of a process to make a UEFI USB Boot that actual works using Fedora?? Very Frustrated... _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On Thu, 9 Sept 2021 at 09:35, Michael D. Setzer II via users < users@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote: [...]
From my understanding from one of the Users. They just got 140 of these new Dell 3080 machines, and they have no options for other than UEFI boot. The 3070 versions of the machines had the option to do regular boots. Could be a more complex process to enable it, but I'm sure he tried lots of things. Got a message about Lenova doing the same, but no specifics from that user. Went to Dell site, but there site seems to have no options unless you provide a code number from an actual machine?? Right now, the user is having to physically remove drives from 3080 machine, and connect them to a 3070 machine to do image, and then can put the drive back??
It is not surprising that legacy boot is going away -- vendors want to minimize support issues and removing "features" that few customers use gives users one less way to break systems and allows them to simplify the BIOS code.
You might look at Knoppix UEFI support < https://www.knopper.net/knoppix/knoppix-uefi-en.html%3E It looks like they have automated the process of creating a "machine owner key" (MOK) when booting.
On 9 Sep 2021 at 14:09, George N. White III wrote:
From: "George N. White III" gnwiii@gmail.com Date sent: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 14:09:57 -0300 Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? To: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Thu, 9 Sept 2021 at 09:35, Michael D. Setzer II via users users@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote: [...] From my understanding from one of the Users. They just got 140 of these new Dell 3080 machines, and they have no options for other than UEFI boot. The 3070 versions of the machines had the option to do regular boots. Could be a more complex process to enable it, but I'm sure he tried lots of things. Got a message about Lenova doing the same, but no specifics from that user. Went to Dell site, but there site seems to have no options unless you provide a code number from an actual machine?? Right now, the user is having to physically remove drives from 3080 machine, and connect them to a 3070 machine to do image, and then can put the drive back??
It is not surprising that legacy boot is going away -- vendors want to minimize support issues and removing "features" that few customers use gives users one less way to break systems and allows them to simplify the BIOS code.
You might look at Knoppix UEFI support <https://www.knopper.net/knoppix/knoppix-uefi-en.html > It looks like they have automated the process of creating a "machine owner key" (MOK) when booting.
Thanks looked at page, but will have to look into it. Not sure where one gets the hash code, and currently have 5 machines at home, but none using EFI boot, so haven't gone into setting up EFI. From a memtest web page message saw something like the office Secure Key cost like $10,000?? I don't make a dime of G4L, but it is something I enjoy.
Thanks for the info.
-- George N. White III
On Thu, 09 Sep 2021 22:04:04 +1000 Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
Does anyone know of a process to make a UEFI USB Boot that actual works using Fedora??
I've always used:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Multiboot_USB_drive
I created a big utility USB stick with it than can boot the giant collection of ISO images I put on the stick. It can boot either "normal" MSDOS or UEFI, but I've found a lot of computers that don't like one or the other for some reason. I just boot whichever version I can get to work. Here's my notes for setting up the initial stick:
If starting from scratch, use gparted to erase all partitions from the usb stick.
Create a 4 GB fat32 partition labeled BOOTUSB
Create an ext4 partition labeled DATAUSB in remainder of space.
Using /dev/sdc as the example name of the usb stick device, run these commands to install grub on the BOOTUSB partition (taken from the web page at https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Multiboot_USB_drive).
mount /dev/sdc1 /mnt mkdir /mnt/boot grub2-install --target=i386-pc --recheck --boot-directory=/mnt/boot /dev/sdc grub2-install --target x86_64-efi --removable --boot-directory=/mnt/boot --efi-directory=/mnt
Now copy in the grub.cfg file (gets very specific to my case after this).
Would wiping the computer's hard drives help in any way?....you know...like working with a "clean slate"?....and I believe its F12 for getting in the the Bios?..but F2 or F8 to get to the BIOS settings...I only ask because I recall a time when I had a Dell Vostro and a Dell XPS...they both gave me problems...then I' booted into a Live version of Fedora Linux and wiped their drives clean...left them formatted as NTFS...and then attempted installs.....after getting into the BIO menu I disable UEFI and installed Pop-OS on the XPS....and the Vostro which was for someone else got Linux mint...with no problem. (Never really understood the need for trying to hide or lock down the UEFI feature...some people who are computer savvy WANT the option of leaving it on or taking it off!)
EGO II
On 9/9/21 9:15 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Thu, 09 Sep 2021 22:04:04 +1000 Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
Does anyone know of a process to make a UEFI USB Boot that actual works using Fedora??
I've always used:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Multiboot_USB_drive
I created a big utility USB stick with it than can boot the giant collection of ISO images I put on the stick. It can boot either "normal" MSDOS or UEFI, but I've found a lot of computers that don't like one or the other for some reason. I just boot whichever version I can get to work. Here's my notes for setting up the initial stick:
If starting from scratch, use gparted to erase all partitions from the usb stick.
Create a 4 GB fat32 partition labeled BOOTUSB
Create an ext4 partition labeled DATAUSB in remainder of space.
Using /dev/sdc as the example name of the usb stick device, run these commands to install grub on the BOOTUSB partition (taken from the web page at https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Multiboot_USB_drive).
mount /dev/sdc1 /mnt mkdir /mnt/boot grub2-install --target=i386-pc --recheck --boot-directory=/mnt/boot /dev/sdc grub2-install --target x86_64-efi --removable --boot-directory=/mnt/boot --efi-directory=/mnt
Now copy in the grub.cfg file (gets very specific to my case after this). _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On 9/9/21 6:27 AM, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote:
Would wiping the computer's hard drives help in any way?....you know...like working with a "clean slate"?....and I believe its F12 for getting in the the Bios?..but F2 or F8 to get to the BIOS settings...I only ask because I recall a time when I had a Dell Vostro and a Dell XPS...they both gave me problems...then I' booted into a Live version of Fedora Linux and wiped their drives clean...left them formatted as NTFS...and then attempted installs.....after getting into the BIO menu I disable UEFI and installed Pop-OS on the XPS....and the Vostro which was for someone else got Linux mint...with no problem. (Never really understood the need for trying to hide or lock down the UEFI feature...some people who are computer savvy WANT the option of leaving it on or taking it off!)
I think you're misunderstanding the goal here. He's trying to create a UEFI bootable flash drive, not boot off the hard drive. Wiping the hard drive would be the complete opposite of the objective which is make a drive image of the existing hard drive by booting from a flash drive.
On 9 Sep 2021 at 9:15, Tom Horsley wrote:
Date sent: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 09:15:30 -0400 From: Tom Horsley horsley1953@gmail.com To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Thu, 09 Sep 2021 22:04:04 +1000 Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
Does anyone know of a process to make a UEFI USB Boot that actual works using Fedora??
I've always used:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Multiboot_USB_drive
I created a big utility USB stick with it than can boot the giant collection of ISO images I put on the stick. It can boot either "normal" MSDOS or UEFI, but I've found a lot of computers that don't like one or the other for some reason. I just boot whichever version I can get to work. Here's my notes for setting up the initial stick:
If starting from scratch, use gparted to erase all partitions from the usb stick.
Create a 4 GB fat32 partition labeled BOOTUSB
Create an ext4 partition labeled DATAUSB in remainder of space.
Using /dev/sdc as the example name of the usb stick device, run these commands to install grub on the BOOTUSB partition (taken from the web page at https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Multiboot_USB_drive).
mount /dev/sdc1 /mnt mkdir /mnt/boot grub2-install --target=i386-pc --recheck --boot-directory=/mnt/boot /dev/sdc grub2-install --target x86_64-efi --removable --boot-directory=/mnt/boot --efi-directory=/mnt
At that step I end up getting the error message? grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot.
Don't know if something change in the grub2-install that causes it to fail??
Then not sure if get that to work, what would be the exact format for the grub.cfg and where would be the spot to put the kernel and ramdisk.lzma files?
Thanks for the input.
Now copy in the grub.cfg file (gets very specific to my case after this). _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On Fri, 10 Sep 2021 00:39:27 +1000 Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
At that step I end up getting the error message? grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot.
I've never gotten that error. Are use sure it is an error rather than just an information message that the efi boot won't work on a secure boot system? Grub barely make any distinction between errors and simple messages.
There is also a --force option for grub2-install which might make it go ahead and do the install anyway if it really was an error.
On 9 Sep 2021 at 10:48, Tom Horsley wrote:
Date sent: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 10:48:19 -0400 From: Tom Horsley horsley1953@gmail.com To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Fri, 10 Sep 2021 00:39:27 +1000 Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
At that step I end up getting the error message? grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot.
I've never gotten that error. Are use sure it is an error rather than just an information message that the efi boot won't work on a secure boot system? Grub barely make any distinction between errors and simple messages.
I have looked at the flash afterwards, and there are not grub files placed on the partitions, so it isn't a message that comes up after it has installed the grub2. It seems to completely halt the process of installing.
There is also a --force option for grub2-install which might make it go ahead and do the install anyway if it really was an error.
Did try the --force, but still get the same message and nothing is written to the flash directory??
Perhaps it did work with a previous version of grub2-install, but current version on my fully update Fedora 33 machines are doing this.
Looked at file to see if maybe it was a script to see if it could be modified, but it is an ELF file..
Prehaps the process on a non-Fedora machine would actually work??
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On Sep 9, 2021, at 10:40, Michael D. Setzer II via users users@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote:
At that step I end up getting the error message? grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot.
The basic answer is: Don’t use grub2-install on Fedora UEFI systems.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1917213
You will have to boot into another OS to create a UEFI boot using grub-install.
However, you can use the files from the Fedora grub2-efi-x64 and shim-x64 packages, and just copy them into the /EFI/BOOT directory of the fat32 partition, which should work for the Secure Boot systems, although the expect to find grub2 EFI executables in /EFI/fedora.
If you can’t disable Secure Boot, that’s what I suggest.
— Jonathan Billings
On 9 Sep 2021 at 17:50, Jonathan Billings wrote:
From: Jonathan Billings billings@negate.org Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? Date sent: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 17:50:36 -0400 To: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Sep 9, 2021, at 10:40, Michael D. Setzer II via users users@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote:
At that step I end up getting the error message? grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot.The basic answer is: Don’t use grub2-install on Fedora UEFI systems.
That bug report seems to have a lot in it. States that the Fedora version is setup for the Fedora signed version, but the grub2-install then would try to install and unsigned version, and then if the secure boot was turned back on, it would then fail to boot the signed kernels??
But I'm trying to get it to create an EFI on a separate USB flash, so not sure how that would effect the EFI booting of the hard disk??
Seen similar stuff on Syslinux list about work on getting EFI support, and that has been going on for years. 6.03 of syslinux is still the latest full release going back to 2014, but the 6.04 has work done, but doesn't seem to be ready for prime time.
More to look at, but less hope of finding a easy/simple solution. Just downloaded and build 3 new kernels from kernel.org, and with the regular (non EFI) they all work just fine. Thanks for the info..
You will have to boot into another OS to create a UEFI boot using grub-install.
However, you can use the files from the Fedora grub2-efi-x64 and shim-x64 packages, and just copy them into the /EFI/BOOT directory of the fat32 partition, which should work for the Secure Boot systems, although the expect to find grub2 EFI executables in /EFI/fedora.
If you can’t disable Secure Boot, that’s what I suggest.
— Jonathan Billings
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 03:21:48PM +1000, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
More to look at, but less hope of finding a easy/simple solution. Just downloaded and build 3 new kernels from kernel.org, and with the regular (non EFI) they all work just fine. Thanks for the info..
I build and boot upstream kernels quite often, and I do this on Fedora systems with UEFI and Secure Boot turned off. But I typically am just rebuilding the rawhide kernel and adding my patches to the patch list in the spec, building the kernel and installing the package (if it succeeds to build).
It's so much easier to just add kernels to a working UEFI build than try to generate a base UEFI boot structure from scratch -- and anyway, what's the point of having a booting kernel without a known good base OS to run under it?
On 10 Sep 2021 at 8:23, Jonathan Billings wrote:
Date sent: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 08:23:09 -0400 From: Jonathan Billings billings@negate.org To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 03:21:48PM +1000, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
More to look at, but less hope of finding a easy/simple solution. Just downloaded and build 3 new kernels from kernel.org, and with the regular (non EFI) they all work just fine. Thanks for the info..
I build and boot upstream kernels quite often, and I do this on Fedora systems with UEFI and Secure Boot turned off. But I typically am just rebuilding the rawhide kernel and adding my patches to the patch list in the spec, building the kernel and installing the package (if it succeeds to build).
It's so much easier to just add kernels to a working UEFI build than try to generate a base UEFI boot structure from scratch -- and anyway, what's the point of having a booting kernel without a known good base OS to run under it?
Totally missing the point of the G4L project. It is to make bare metal images of disk or partitions. You can't make an image if the partition is running on the disk since the contents is modified with it runs. The G4l loads the kernel and file system in ram so the disk is free to copied or reimaged. I've even reimaged 20 machines at one time using udpcast. Can restore windows and other partition directly from the grub menu.
Interesting that you can tweak the kernel the way you want, but as you stated, you have the secure boot option turned off, so doesn't that defeat part of what the UEFI is suppose to do?
I could probable boot from a Fedora live cd, and install the 23 packages that are not included that G4L uses at various points, and it would work. But that is boot a 2G OS instead of a 10M kernel and 30M Filesytem. 50 times the size and it requires internet access to download the 23 packages. Additional, after I did that, I just want to see if I could do a full update of the live cd. Ran the dnf update, and it reported that it was short almost 400M to be able do the update, so couldn't even run a fully updated system. At present, on my build machine, I have a script that copies any updates from the Fedora system that are used by the package, and can build a complete Image in about 12 minutes. Building new kernels from source code takes about 10 minutes.
So, the G4L isn't trying to be a complete OS, but server the needs of some.
At present, it shows I had 271 downloads this week from sourceforge site, and it is on other places. There is also Clonzilla and other packages that do similar things.
The early Norton Ghost (Actual another company made it before Norton bought it). That actual ran from a DOS boot. So, it is a special purpose tool..
Perhaps in the near future Secure boot will be the only options, and you will lose your ability to tweak systems as well.
-- Jonathan Billings billings@negate.org _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 11:49:38PM +1000, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
Totally missing the point of the G4L project. It is to make bare metal images of disk or partitions. You can't make an image if the partition is running on the disk since the contents is modified with it runs. The G4l loads the kernel and file system in ram so the disk is free to copied or reimaged. I've even reimaged 20 machines at one time using udpcast. Can restore windows and other partition directly from the grub menu.
I used Ghost4Linux before, although it was years ago before I ever touched a UEFI system.
I think that if you are required to run some kernel provided by a project, then they need to provide a kernel that works with the initial ramdisk, and that includes kernel modules needed to load network devices and storage systems.
If the Ghost4Linux project doesn't have a UEFI-capable boot image, then building some random kernel isn't going to help you. You need the kernel that is the exact same version as the kmods in the initrd that loads g4l. You could probably just any UEFI-capable boot image and just move the kernel and initrd into there, but it still won't be able to be used on a Secure Boot system because the kernel isn't signed.
On 10 Sep 2021 at 10:43, Jonathan Billings wrote:
Date sent: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 10:43:15 -0400 From: Jonathan Billings billings@negate.org To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 11:49:38PM +1000, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
Totally missing the point of the G4L project. It is to make bare metal images of disk or partitions. You can't make an image if the partition is running on the disk since the contents is modified with it runs. The G4l loads the kernel and file system in ram so the disk is free to copied or reimaged. I've even reimaged 20 machines at one time using udpcast. Can restore windows and other partition directly from the grub menu.
I used Ghost4Linux before, although it was years ago before I ever touched a UEFI system.
I think that if you are required to run some kernel provided by a project, then they need to provide a kernel that works with the initial ramdisk, and that includes kernel modules needed to load network devices and storage systems.
The G4L kernels require no kernel modules. That is one the file system will work with any of the kernels with no changes at all. Just build new kernel, and copy it to the boot directly ad change the lines in the syslinux.cfg to match the latest kernel. Don't have to make any changes. After doing a dnf update on the build machine, have a simple script that automatically copies any new program files and libraries that were updated.
If the Ghost4Linux project doesn't have a UEFI-capable boot image, then building some random kernel isn't going to help you. You need the kernel that is the exact same version as the kmods in the initrd that loads g4l. You could probably just any UEFI-capable boot image and just move the kernel and initrd into there, but it still won't be able to be used on a Secure Boot system because the kernel isn't signed.
The kernels have the EFI option in the .config file, so the kernels should be able to be loaded via the EFI process somehow, but so far I haven't gotten it to work. Maybe I'll eventual figure it out, or maybe not. Like I've said, Clonzilla went with booting a distribution that supported UEFI, and then added there stuff to that. Could do the same, but it requires a lot more steps then simple booting from a CD or USB...
Seen some post on Windows 11 hardware requirements, and it might soon make only secure boot a requirement for anyone. Just seems there should be a way to get it to work, but I'm retired and gives me something to play with. I don't have any machines that require UEFI boot. Perhaps I should setup a system with UEFI, and see if the 40_custome option works. I do know that a UEFI boot system will fail to install memtest. Had a person with a machine that was have weird issues. Went to run memtest on it, but couldn't install. Was able to boot from my g4l, which includes memtest and ran it. Found that his new machine had a bad memory stick. Vendor then replaced it, and problem was fixed. But without memtest, wouldn't have know that. Interesting the PowerEdge server I had like 20 years ago, was running NT 2000 without errors, but then added Fedora to it, and was getting errors in image files store on it. Ran memtest, an no errors until test 9. Had a few bits that where bad. Turned out 1 of the 4 512M rams had issues. Again, Vendor replaced it and problem went away.
-- Jonathan Billings billings@negate.org _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 01:11:38AM +1000, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
The G4L kernels require no kernel modules. That is one the file system will work with any of the kernels with no changes at all. Just build new kernel, and copy it to the boot directly ad change the lines in the syslinux.cfg to match the latest kernel. Don't have to make any changes.
So, that makes sense, and if this is a heavily customized, boot-from-ram system, then it would work fine with all the drivers compiled into the kernel and not as modules, although it would make the kernel rather large.
After doing a dnf update on the build machine, have a simple script that automatically copies any new program files and libraries that were updated.
Wait, I'm confused, now you are talking about dnf, I thought this was an all-in-one initrd system, what is using dnf?
The kernels have the EFI option in the .config file, so the kernels should be able to be loaded via the EFI process somehow, but so far I haven't gotten it to work. Maybe I'll eventual figure it out, or maybe not. Like I've said, Clonzilla went with booting a distribution that supported UEFI, and then added there stuff to that. Could do the same, but it requires a lot more steps then simple booting from a CD or USB...
Where are you putting these kernels on the EFI volume?
For example, if you have the msdos-formatted volume mounted as /boot/efi, the EFI firmware looks for this:
/boot/efi/EFI/BOOT/BOOTX64.EFI
... by default. You can make that be your kernel, a GRUB2 EFI executable or the shimx64.efi, which is what Fedora systems uses. The shimx64.efi executable is a signed UEFI executable that launches GRUB2. But if you want to disable Secure Boot, you could just put it in EFI/BOOT/BOOTX64.EFI and it should detect it by default.
Seen some post on Windows 11 hardware requirements, and it might soon make only secure boot a requirement for anyone.
The UEFI spec says that on x86_64 systems you should be able to disable secure boot. Dell most likely has that option, because they have a lot of customers who need it. (for example, if you use nvidia and CUDA, you'll need to disable secure boot or manually install your own signing keys)
Just seems there should be a way to get it to work, but I'm retired and gives me something to play with. I don't have any machines that require UEFI boot. Perhaps I should setup a system with UEFI, and see if the 40_custome option works. I do know that a UEFI boot system will fail to install memtest.
libvirtd lets you set up UEFI VMs, even on systems that don't have UEFI boot, which is something I have. In virt-manager, just click to configure the VM before starting the install, and go over into Overview, you can change the Firmware from BIOS to UEFI. I believe there's a secboot firmware option, even, although I've not tested it.
Then you can test to your heart's content.
On 10 Sep 2021 at 16:10, Jonathan Billings wrote:
Date sent: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 16:10:50 -0400 From: Jonathan Billings billings@negate.org To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 01:11:38AM +1000, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
The G4L kernels require no kernel modules. That is one the file system will work with any of the kernels with no changes at all. Just build new kernel, and copy it to the boot directly ad change the lines in the syslinux.cfg to match the latest kernel. Don't have to make any changes.
So, that makes sense, and if this is a heavily customized, boot-from-ram system, then it would work fine with all the drivers compiled into the kernel and not as modules, although it would make the kernel rather large.
Kernels are currently about 10M in size since they include Disk and Nic drivers, but don't have all the Video and Sound and other things.
On my notebook here the 3 linux kernels plus the rescue kernel are all 11M. The initrd for the 3 linux kernels are 47M and the rescue one is 102M, while the G4L is about 30M, and that is all. No disk that contains anything else needed. All runs in the Ram.
After doing a dnf update on the build machine, have a simple script that automatically copies any new program files and libraries that were updated.
Wait, I'm confused, now you are talking about dnf, I thought this was an all-in-one initrd system, what is using dnf?
I'm talking about if I boot from the Fedora Live cd to get a system that will actually boot from the EFI. The Fedora Live CD does boot just fine, but in a quick look I've found there are 23 packages that are no included in the live cd image, so if I tried to run the G4L script it would fail.
Comparing the bin sbin directors, I've found these packages are not included.
dnf install ncftp nano dialog fsarchiver aespipe bwm-ng dd_rescue ddrescue f3 hexedit iperf fuse-sshfs strace testdisk hdparm dmidecode nvme-cli gpm rpcbind partclone udpcast
So, to get the Fedora Live CD image to support the script those need to be installed. Some might not be used by the 2460 line main script, but programs I've used to make other things easier.
The kernels have the EFI option in the .config file, so the kernels should be able to be loaded via the EFI process somehow, but so far I haven't gotten it to work. Maybe I'll eventual figure it out, or maybe not. Like I've said, Clonzilla went with booting a distribution that supported UEFI, and then added there stuff to that. Could do the same, but it requires a lot more steps then simple booting from a CD or USB...
Where are you putting these kernels on the EFI volume?
That is what I'm trying to figure out. I'm trying to make a Flash that has EFI boot setup. Might be if I had a system setup with an EFI boot, I could place the kernel files in a similar process to the 40_custom on the standard grub2. I've tried a few options that created a flash that is seen as a UEFI boot flash, but putting the iso image as some use or the kernel and ramdisk files in places examples show, it boots, and I can select but get blank screens or error messages that don't give info. Should have documented all of that, but once something failed went on to try other options.
For example, if you have the msdos-formatted volume mounted as /boot/efi, the EFI firmware looks for this:
/boot/efi/EFI/BOOT/BOOTX64.EFI
... by default. You can make that be your kernel, a GRUB2 EFI executable or the shimx64.efi, which is what Fedora systems uses. The shimx64.efi executable is a signed UEFI executable that launches GRUB2. But if you want to disable Secure Boot, you could just put it in EFI/BOOT/BOOTX64.EFI and it should detect it by default.
But right now the latest process I've been testing has a line to install the grub2 with efi on the flash, but it comes up with a message that it doesn't work because it doesn't support secure EFI boot, and no files are placed in the flash for the efi. The efi-386 install option goes thru fine, but all kernels are now 64bit since Fedora no longer has a 32 version of OS.
Seen some post on Windows 11 hardware requirements, and it might soon make only secure boot a requirement for anyone.
The UEFI spec says that on x86_64 systems you should be able to disable secure boot. Dell most likely has that option, because they have a lot of customers who need it. (for example, if you use nvidia and CUDA, you'll need to disable secure boot or manually install your own signing keys)
Think Disabling the Secure boot is not an issue. Person has Dell 3070 machines that allow for the regular USB boot, but just got 140 new Dell 3080 machines, and they seem to have completely elimanated the option??
Just seems there should be a way to get it to work, but I'm retired and gives me something to play with. I don't have any machines that require UEFI boot. Perhaps I should setup a system with UEFI, and see if the 40_custome option works. I do know that a UEFI boot system will fail to install memtest.
libvirtd lets you set up UEFI VMs, even on systems that don't have UEFI boot, which is something I have. In virt-manager, just click to configure the VM before starting the install, and go over into Overview, you can change the Firmware from BIOS to UEFI. I believe there's a secboot firmware option, even, although I've not tested it.
Will have to look at it. I've got a 9/11 motorcycle escort to go to, so need to head out. It's already 7:30am on 9/11 here in Guam. GMT+10 - Guam - Where America's Day Begins.
Then you can test to your heart's content.
-- Jonathan Billings billings@negate.org _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On Sep 10, 2021, at 17:32, Michael D. Setzer II mikes@guam.net wrote:
That is what I'm trying to figure out. I'm trying to make a Flash that has EFI boot setup. Might be if I had a system setup with an EFI boot, I could place the kernel files in a similar process to the 40_custom on the standard grub2. I've tried a few options that created a flash that is seen as a UEFI boot flash, but putting the iso image as some use or the kernel and ramdisk files in places examples show, it boots, and I can select but get blank screens or error messages that don't give info. Should have documented all of that, but once something failed went on to try other options.
Give up trying to use grub2-install, it doesn’t do what you need it to do.
UEFI boots off EFI executables on a fat32 volume, you don’t need to install special sectors on the beginning of the disk, so you don’t really need to run fancy commands, just ‘cp’.
Seen some post on Windows 11 hardware requirements, and it might soon make only secure boot a requirement for anyone.
The UEFI spec says that on x86_64 systems you should be able to disable secure boot. Dell most likely has that option, because they have a lot of customers who need it. (for example, if you use nvidia and CUDA, you'll need to disable secure boot or manually install your own signing keys)
Think Disabling the Secure boot is not an issue. Person has Dell 3070 machines that allow for the regular USB boot, but just got 140 new Dell 3080 machines, and they seem to have completely elimanated the option??
According to the manual:
Make sure you have USB boot enabled:
https://www.dell.com/support/manuals/en-us/optiplex-3080-desktop/optiplex308...
Under “USB configuration.
Also, according to this:
https://www.dell.com/support/manuals/en-us/optiplex-3080-desktop/optiplex308...
Hitting F12 will list all *valid* boot options. Most likely your boot disk isn’t valid if you have USB boot enabled.
— Jonathan Billings
https://www.dell.com/support/manuals/en-us/optiplex-308 0-desktop/optiplex3080_micro_specs/boot-menu?guid=gu id-8fc0315f-0cbf-461a-996f-54a98f99d05a&lang=en-us
Shows only. The options are:
UEFI Boot: Windows Boot Manager
The bios option only talk about updating the bios from options if you can't do it from windows.
The exact same USB boots fine from the Dell 3070 units. Also my Dell desktop has no problem seeing the USB and booting from one that has grub4dos, but it does show up under a regular USB option in contrace to the UEFI USB.
On 10 Sep 2021 at 19:24, Jonathan Billings wrote:
From: Jonathan Billings billings@negate.org Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? Date sent: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 19:24:08 -0400 To: "Michael D. Setzer II" mikes@guam.net Copies to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Sep 10, 2021, at 17:32, Michael D. Setzer II mikes@guam.net wrote: That is what I'm trying to figure out. I'm trying to make a Flash that has EFI boot setup. Might be if I had a system setup with an EFI boot, I could place the kernel files in a similar process to the 40_custom on the standard grub2. I've tried a few options that created a flash that is seen as a UEFI boot flash, but putting the iso image as some use or the kernel and ramdisk files in places examples show, it boots, and I can select but get blank screens or error messages that don't give info. Should have documented all of that, but once something failed went on to try other options.
Give up trying to use grub2-install, it doesn’t do what you need it to do.
UEFI boots off EFI executables on a fat32 volume, you don’t need to install special sectors on the beginning of the disk, so you don’t really need to run fancy commands, just ‘cp’.
Seen some post on Windows 11 hardware requirements, and it might soon make only secure boot a requirement for anyone. The UEFI spec says that on x86_64 systems you should be able to disable secure boot. Dell most likely has that option, because they have a lot of customers who need it. (for example, if you use nvidia and CUDA, you'll need to disable secure boot or manually install your own signing keys) Think Disabling the Secure boot is not an issue. Person has Dell 3070 machines that allow for the regular USB boot, but just got 140 new Dell 3080 machines, and they seem to have completely elimanated the option??According to the manual:
Make sure you have USB boot enabled:
https://www.dell.com/support/manuals/en-us/optiplex-3080-desktop/optiplex308... icro_specs/secure-boot-options?guid=guid-6f850c24-e71e-4b82-b498-c0dd48e2181 0&lang=en-us
Under “USB configuration.
Also, according to this:
https://www.dell.com/support/manuals/en-us/optiplex-3080-desktop/optiplex308... icro_specs/secure-boot-options?guid=guid-6f850c24-e71e-4b82-b498-c0dd48e2181 0&lang=en-us
Hitting F12 will list all *valid* boot options. Most likely your boot disk isn’t valid if you have USB boot enabled.
All those options are talking about Secure boot keys. Turning off the Secure boot is not an issue. The user has done that, but the exact same USB Flash that boots fine on a 3070 doesn't show up as an option on the 3080.
He can take a hard disk from a 3080 machine, install it in a 3070 machine, boot from the exact same USB on the 3070, and create and image with the 3070. The exact same USB does not show up on the 3080 as a boot option. Yes, it is not currently an EFI Flash so would not show up as a UEFI Flash boot option, but it also doesn't show up as a regular USB boot option.
You seem to be stuck on harping about turning off secure boot, but that has been done with no problem.
— Jonathan Billings
On 9/10/21 10:32 PM, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
All those options are talking about Secure boot keys. Turning off the Secure boot is not an issue. The user has done that, but the exact same USB Flash that boots fine on a 3070 doesn't show up as an option on the 3080.
He can take a hard disk from a 3080 machine, install it in a 3070 machine, boot from the exact same USB on the 3070, and create and image with the 3070. The exact same USB does not show up on the 3080 as a boot option. Yes, it is not currently an EFI Flash so would not show up as a UEFI Flash boot option, but it also doesn't show up as a regular USB boot option.
You seem to be stuck on harping about turning off secure boot, but that has been done with no problem.
A lot of the problem is that you are being very unclear about what you're doing and it's very hard to follow. Now what you're saying is that a non-EFI flash drive doesn't boot on an EFI system. Why do you need to point that out? Unless you can enable legacy or CSM mode, it's obviously not going to work. And newer systems don't have that option any more.
Also, you apparently ignored the part where he told you that there is no point in trying to use grub-install. It's not useful for EFI. You just need to copy a few files into the right directories.
On 11 Sep 2021 at 0:55, Samuel Sieb wrote:
Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org From: Samuel Sieb samuel@sieb.net Date sent: Sat, 11 Sep 2021 00:55:54 -0700 Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 9/10/21 10:32 PM, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
All those options are talking about Secure boot keys. Turning off the Secure boot is not an issue. The user has done that, but the exact same USB Flash that boots fine on a 3070 doesn't show up as an option on the 3080.
He can take a hard disk from a 3080 machine, install it in a 3070 machine, boot from the exact same USB on the 3070, and create and image with the 3070. The exact same USB does not show up on the 3080 as a boot option. Yes, it is not currently an EFI Flash so would not show up as a UEFI Flash boot option, but it also doesn't show up as a regular USB boot option.
You seem to be stuck on harping about turning off secure boot, but that has been done with no problem.
A lot of the problem is that you are being very unclear about what you're doing and it's very hard to follow. Now what you're saying is that a non-EFI flash drive doesn't boot on an EFI system. Why do you need to point that out? Unless you can enable legacy or CSM mode, it's obviously not going to work. And newer systems don't have that option any more.
Not sure how I can be clearer? Have a system that works fine with regular booting from a USB, but doesn't work on a new machine? Looking for a way to get it to work. Syslinux 6.04pre has some efi stuff, but I've tried it a couple times, and didn't work. Last release files go back to 2016??
Also, you apparently ignored the part where he told you that there is no point in trying to use grub-install. It's not useful for EFI. You just need to copy a few files into the right directories.
Question: Have a web site that I mentioned that says the grub2-install actually did work at some point, and a user on this list said that he used it in the past with no issue.
If grub2-install doesn't support efi why does man grub2-install show grub-install [--modules=MODULES] [--install-modules=MODULES] [--themes=THEMES] [--fonts=FONTS] [--locales=LOCALES] [--compress[=no,xz,gz,lzo]] [-d | --directory=DIR] [--grub-mkimage=FILE] [--boot-directory=DIR] [--target=TARGET] [--grub-setup=FILE] [--grub-mkrelpath=FILE] [--grub-probe=FILE] [--allow-floppy] [--recheck] [--force] [--force-file-id] [--disk-module=MODULE] [--no-nvram] [--removable] [--bootloader-id=ID] [--efi-directory=DIR]
It lists efi-directory, and it has an option --removable that seems to be able create on a flash??
So, did it work at some point, and someone decided to change it, and if so why didn't they remove the --efi-directory option??
I can see where if you already have a system that has the EFI boot setup, it would just be copying files. similar to how the 40_custom file allows the regular grub2 to add options to the grub.cfg to boot. But that doesn't help in creating a standalone flash to boot the files..
I've looked at the Dell machine I've got, and it is a 9020, and it boots the regular usb just fine. Did search thru the setup, and did find under the advanced bios option a check box to allow loading additional rom to support non-UEFI booting, and on my machine it is checked. It does say that if that isn't check you can not boot regular USB devices? Wondering if the 3080 machines might have this option unchecked, so I've sent a message to the user. So, it might be just enabling the option if it is there. If it isn't there still have an issue.
The grub2-install with the i386 option does work, and it puts files on the flash, but the x86_64 option fails and writes nothing to the flash.
Perhaps I need to look at other distros that might support it. Started with Unixware long long ago, and moved the Redhat 9, and have been with Fedora since Core 1 thru 33. Do have a Virtual box setup of 34 as well.
Sorry to have bothered anyone. Seems I can't get there from here.. Have a nice day.
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 06:51:47PM +1000, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
Not sure how I can be clearer? Have a system that works fine with regular booting from a USB, but doesn't work on a new machine? Looking for a way to get it to work. Syslinux 6.04pre has some efi stuff, but I've tried it a couple times, and didn't work. Last release files go back to 2016??
Newer machines == no longer supports legacy boot.
Maybe you should look at some of the other suggestions on your project's forums, such as using Refind? It might be easier to create a bootable disk using refind than trying to build your own image?
Also, you apparently ignored the part where he told you that there is no point in trying to use grub-install. It's not useful for EFI. You just need to copy a few files into the right directories.
Question: Have a web site that I mentioned that says the grub2-install actually did work at some point, and a user on this list said that he used it in the past with no issue.
If grub2-install doesn't support efi why does man grub2-install show grub-install [--modules=MODULES] [--install-modules=MODULES] [--themes=THEMES] [--fonts=FONTS] [--locales=LOCALES] [--compress[=no,xz,gz,lzo]] [-d | --directory=DIR] [--grub-mkimage=FILE] [--boot-directory=DIR] [--target=TARGET] [--grub-setup=FILE] [--grub-mkrelpath=FILE] [--grub-probe=FILE] [--allow-floppy] [--recheck] [--force] [--force-file-id] [--disk-module=MODULE] [--no-nvram] [--removable] [--bootloader-id=ID] [--efi-directory=DIR]
It lists efi-directory, and it has an option --removable that seems to be able create on a flash??
So, did it work at some point, and someone decided to change it, and if so why didn't they remove the --efi-directory option??
If you are curious, here is the patch Fedora adds:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/grub2/blob/f34/f/0169-grub-install-disabl...
This is where it's disabled. GRUB2 has the capability, but it is patched to not work because it doesn't make sense for *Fedora*.
I've looked at the Dell machine I've got, and it is a 9020, and it boots the regular usb just fine. Did search thru the setup, and did find under the advanced bios option a check box to allow loading additional rom to support non-UEFI booting, and on my machine it is checked. It does say that if that isn't check you can not boot regular USB devices? Wondering if the 3080 machines might have this option unchecked, so I've sent a message to the user. So, it might be just enabling the option if it is there. If it isn't there still have an issue.
Intel and motherboard vendors have been saying they're going to drop legacy bootloader support. Honestly, I expected it sooner. It looks like you're seeing some Dells that don't support the legacy bootloader.
Since you appear to be one of the people supporting G4L (I found the thread that must be related to this: https://sourceforge.net/p/g4l/discussion/408763/thread/24d7652d5f/?limit=25#... ) then I am sorry that Fedora isn't useful for creating your project's boot images. But the grub2 package for Fedora is built for booting Fedora, and since it has signed EFI executables that can only be used for booting signed Fedora kernels, that makes sense.
If you want to mess around with building your own UEFI capable boot image with your own kernel and initrd, I suggest going to the GRUB2 web site and compiling it.
I think part of the confusion here was that many people didn't realize you were basically a proxy for supporting someone else in another forum.
-- Jonathan Billings billings@negate.org
On 2021-09-10 9:49 a.m., Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
On 10 Sep 2021 at 8:23, Jonathan Billings wrote:
Date sent: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 08:23:09 -0400 From: Jonathan Billings billings@negate.org To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 03:21:48PM +1000, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
More to look at, but less hope of finding a easy/simple solution. Just downloaded and build 3 new kernels from kernel.org, and with the regular (non EFI) they all work just fine. Thanks for the info..
I build and boot upstream kernels quite often, and I do this on Fedora systems with UEFI and Secure Boot turned off. But I typically am just rebuilding the rawhide kernel and adding my patches to the patch list in the spec, building the kernel and installing the package (if it succeeds to build).
It's so much easier to just add kernels to a working UEFI build than try to generate a base UEFI boot structure from scratch -- and anyway, what's the point of having a booting kernel without a known good base OS to run under it?
Totally missing the point of the G4L project. It is to make bare metal images of disk or partitions. You can't make an image if the partition is running on the disk since the contents is modified with it runs. The G4l loads the kernel and file system in ram so the disk is free to copied or reimaged. I've even reimaged 20 machines at one time using udpcast. Can restore windows and other partition directly from the grub menu.
Interesting that you can tweak the kernel the way you want, but as you stated, you have the secure boot option turned off, so doesn't that defeat part of what the UEFI is suppose to do?
I could probable boot from a Fedora live cd, and install the 23 packages that are not included that G4L uses at various points, and it would work. But that is boot a 2G OS instead of a 10M kernel and 30M Filesytem. 50 times the size and it requires internet access to download the 23 packages. Additional, after I did that, I just want to see if I could do a full update of the live cd. Ran the dnf update, and it reported that it was short almost 400M to be able do the update, so couldn't even run a fully updated system. At present, on my build machine, I have a script that copies any updates from the Fedora system that are used by the package, and can build a complete Image in about 12 minutes. Building new kernels from source code takes about 10 minutes.
So, the G4L isn't trying to be a complete OS, but server the needs of some.
At present, it shows I had 271 downloads this week from sourceforge site, and it is on other places. There is also Clonzilla and other packages that do similar things.
The early Norton Ghost (Actual another company made it before Norton bought it). That actual ran from a DOS boot. So, it is a special purpose tool..
Perhaps in the near future Secure boot will be the only options, and you will lose your ability to tweak systems as well.
Maybe its time to take a step back and ask what the business justification is for going this far out of the way. It seems like you've gone pretty far down a rabbit hole.
With GB networking cheap and ubituitous, disk space at incredibly low prices and RAM at extremely reasonable prices, why are you trying to minimize the platform? The difference is < $100/server, while the cost of you doing this extreme minimization is in the tens of thousands. The maintenance effort for the next guy after you will be even higher.
This customization seems to make no sense. Just install a small platform, maybe like Alpine (130MB) or DSL (50MB). Even better, build out a PXEboot and make future maintenance much easier. Given the extreme minimization that you are attempting, make the machines diskless and put everything in a RAMdisk for a big reliability improvement and a small power and cost reduction. That seems like a much better way to do this.
--
John Mellor
You do not need to do anything fancy at all with a Fedora USB install media. Fedora comes with both UEFI and legacy boot mechanisms, so it just works on all machines. Instead, you have a BIOS setting problem, that is preventing you from seeing the USB key. Fix that, and everything should just work.
On 2021-09-09 8:04 a.m., Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
I've found 6 web sites so far that had instructions on setting up a UEFI USB flash to boot, but all have failed. Some actually create a UEFI Flash that my test usb is seen as being a UEFI flash, but the boot fails?
The last one I fully documented the steps from page, but the resulting flash doesn't even show up as an UEFI Flash. Probable due to the failure of the grub2-install option?? grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot.
So, it seems it worked on some system before, but fails with Fedora 33 at least?? Don't want to create a UEFI Secure Boot, but just a UEFI Boot??
#https://linuxconfig.org/how-to-create-multiboot-usb-with-linux parted -s /dev/sdb mklabel msdos parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary 1MiB 551Mib parted -s /dev/sdb set 1 esp on parted -s /dev/sdb set 1 boot on mkfs.fat -F32 /dev/sdb1 parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary 551Mib 100% mkfs.ext4 /dev/sdb2 mkdir /media/{efi,data} mount /dev/sdb1 /media/efi mount /dev/sdb2 /media/data # Installing legacy grub2 grub2-install \ --target=i386-pc \ --recheck \ --boot-directory="/media/data/boot" /dev/sdb
# Installing grub for efi grub2-install \ --target=x86_64-efi \ --recheck \ --force \ --removable \ --efi-directory="/media/efi" \ --boot-directory="/media/data/boot" ## grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot. mkdir /media/data/boot/iso chown 1000:1000 /media/data/boot/iso cd /media/data/boot/iso/ cp /home/msetzerii/g4l0.60alpha/g4l-v0.60.iso . cd /media/data/boot/grub2 #create grub.cfg with these lines. #menuentry "G4L" { # isofile="/boot/iso/g4l-v0.60.iso" # loopback loop "${isofile}" # linux (loop)/isolinux/bz5x13.14 iso-scan/filename="${isofile}" root=/dev/ram0 # initrd (loop)/isolinux/ramdisk.lzma #}
Have just got had email chat with Clonezilla developer to see what they have done. Seems they gave up on trying to make a UEFI boot, and have created a live-cd boot of a distro to get around issue.
Seems going from boot loaders link syslinux, grub4dos, and regular grub2 with a 10M kernel and 30M ramdisk. With Fedora, it would require the 2G live CD image, and then the downloading of a number of packages that are not included on the live-cd. So, 40M to 2000+M and a bunch of steps.
Does anyone know of a process to make a UEFI USB Boot that actual works using Fedora??
Very Frustrated...
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On 9 Sep 2021 at 10:37, John Mellor wrote:
From: John Mellor john.mellor@gmail.com Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Date sent: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 10:37:11 -0400 Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
You do not need to do anything fancy at all with a Fedora USB install media. Fedora comes with both UEFI and legacy boot mechanisms, so it just works on all machines. Instead, you have a BIOS setting problem, that is preventing you from seeing the USB key. Fix that, and everything should just work.
The problem is not with the Fedora installation, since it does have the UEFI boot setup. Trying to boot from a CD/USB that has a kernel built from kernel.org source code, and load the ramdisk.lzma file system to run the package from. Works fine with syslinux, regular grub2, and grub4dos boot. Just these new Dell machines have NO BIOS or Legacy options to boot, so will only boot from CD or USB that is UEFI setup.
I have one Dell machine, but it is an older one, and it has regular boot options for me with no problem, but this user has new Dell machines, that seem to have removed all options other than UEFI boot.
Got a reply from one user on a setup, but just tried it, and get he same failure message when trying to setup the efi on the usb. So, don't know if it worked with older version of the program, but is failing with the latest??
grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot.
On 2021-09-09 8:04 a.m., Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote: I've found 6 web sites so far that had instructions on setting up a UEFI USB flash to boot, but all have failed. Some actually create a UEFI Flash that my test usb is seen as being a UEFI flash, but the boot fails?
The last one I fully documented the steps from page, but the resulting flash doesn't even show up as an UEFI Flash. Probable due to the failure of the grub2-install option?? grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot. So, it seems it worked on some system before, but fails with Fedora 33 at least?? Don't want to create a UEFI Secure Boot, but just a UEFI Boot?? #https://linuxconfig.org/how-to-create-multiboot-usb-with-linux parted -s /dev/sdb mklabel msdos parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary 1MiB 551Mib parted -s /dev/sdb set 1 esp on parted -s /dev/sdb set 1 boot on mkfs.fat -F32 /dev/sdb1 parted -s /dev/sdb mkpart primary 551Mib 100% mkfs.ext4 /dev/sdb2 mkdir /media/{efi,data} mount /dev/sdb1 /media/efi mount /dev/sdb2 /media/data # Installing legacy grub2 grub2-install \ --target=i386-pc \ --recheck \ --boot-directory="/media/data/boot" /dev/sdb # Installing grub for efi grub2-install \ --target=x86_64-efi \ --recheck \ --force \ --removable \ --efi-directory="/media/efi" \ --boot-directory="/media/data/boot" ## grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot. mkdir /media/data/boot/iso chown 1000:1000 /media/data/boot/iso cd /media/data/boot/iso/ cp /home/msetzerii/g4l0.60alpha/g4l-v0.60.iso . cd /media/data/boot/grub2 #create grub.cfg with these lines. #menuentry "G4L" { # isofile="/boot/iso/g4l-v0.60.iso" # loopback loop "${isofile}" # linux (loop)/isolinux/bz5x13.14 iso-scan/filename="${isofile}" root=/dev/ram0 # initrd (loop)/isolinux/ramdisk.lzma #} Have just got had email chat with Clonezilla developer to see what they have done. Seems they gave up on trying to make a UEFI boot, and have created a live-cd boot of a distro to get around issue. Seems going from boot loaders link syslinux, grub4dos, and regular grub2 with a 10M kernel and 30M ramdisk. With Fedora, it would require the 2G live CD image, and then the downloading of a number of packages that are not included on the live-cd. So, 40M to 2000+M and a bunch of steps. Does anyone know of a process to make a UEFI USB Boot that actual works using Fedora?? Very Frustrated... _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 10:04:04PM +1000, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
#https://linuxconfig.org/how-to-create-multiboot-usb-with-linux parted -s /dev/sdb mklabel msdos
Any reason why you're using an msdos disk label? I think that most UEFI systems require GPT for booting UEFI-only disks.
On 9 Sep 2021 at 13:16, Jonathan Billings wrote:
Date sent: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 13:16:53 -0400 From: Jonathan Billings billings@negate.org To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 10:04:04PM +1000, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
#https://linuxconfig.org/how-to-create-multiboot-usb-with-linux parted -s /dev/sdb mklabel msdos
Any reason why you're using an msdos disk label? I think that most UEFI systems require GPT for booting UEFI-only disks.
I'm just trying the instructions that the web pages contain. Some do contain instructions for setting up a GPT setup, and they produced USBs that were seen as UEFI bootiable, but they came up with a menu after the section, but loading the ISO or the kernels never worked?
Many of the setups seem to be more of putting multiple Distro ISOs on a single USB versus setting up a singe UEFI boot of a kernel with ramdisk.lzma. Getting a blank screen with no message leaves one in dark.
-- Jonathan Billings billings@negate.org _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 10:04:04PM +1000, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
I've found 6 web sites so far that had instructions on setting up a UEFI USB flash to boot, but all have failed. Some actually create a UEFI Flash that my test usb is seen as being a UEFI flash, but the boot fails?
In the six things, have you tried Fedora Media Writer? This is the official thing we use and test, and it definitely successfully creates UEFI-bootable flash drives. It's not as full-featured as some of the other tools, but it's meant to do that one thing very successfully.
On 9 Sep 2021 at 13:18, Matthew Miller wrote:
Date sent: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 13:18:28 -0400 From: Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org To: "Michael D. Setzer II via users" users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 10:04:04PM +1000, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
I've found 6 web sites so far that had instructions on setting up a UEFI USB flash to boot, but all have failed. Some actually create a UEFI Flash that my test usb is seen as being a UEFI flash, but the boot fails?
In the six things, have you tried Fedora Media Writer? This is the official thing we use and test, and it definitely successfully creates UEFI-bootable flash drives. It's not as full-featured as some of the other tools, but it's meant to do that one thing very successfully.
Problem is Fedora Media Writer is to create a USB with Fedora Media on it. I'm NOT having an issue with installing Fedora. I have built an open source project using my Fedora machines since 2004, and have created CD, and usb media, and even loaded the resulting kernel and ramdisk.lzma from grub2 with no issue. It is now getting a process that will do the same for a UEFI only boot system on Dell and seems newer Lenova machine. Have now had two things that show using grub2-install to setup up, but that fails on my Fedora 33 with:
grub2-install: error: this utility cannot be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot.
I don't want to create a UEFI Secure boot, since I have no way to pay for the expensive process of getting an official signature for the kernels I build from kernel.org source code. Kernels are about 10M in size, and the ramdisk.lzma is about 30M with supporting file system that then runs in Ram. In contrast the Fedora live Image is about 2G in size, and doesn't include a number of packages that are needed for the disk imaging.
From my email from Clonzillia they use Unbunta or Debian live-cd to support UEFI boot, and then add there stuff on top of it. I've used Fedora since 2004, and its worked well. So going from a 40M solution that works to a solution that would require 2000M plus require internet access to download the additional packages needed seems Dumb.
Perhaps I'm missing something on why there is so difficult an option to create a UEFI non-secure boot USB. Like I mentioned the person can physically take the drive out of the Dell 3080 machine, and connect it to a 3070 machine, and do the image process with no issue, and then put the drive back in the 3080 machine??
All it takes to add it to the regular grub2 boot on Fedora machines is the following lines in 40_custom file, and copying the bz5x13.15 kernel file and the ramdisk.lzma file into /boot.
menuentry G4L { linux /bz5x13.15 root=/dev/ram0 initrd /ramdisk.lzma }
-- Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On Fri, 10 Sep 2021 05:22:34 +1000 Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
I'm NOT having an issue with installing Fedora.
Before I figured out how to use grub2-install directly, I would sometimes get grub installed by installing fedora on the disk, then remove all the fedora bits and modify the config to boot what I wanted. Round-a-bout way to do it, but it did work. Never tried that with UEFI though.
On 9/9/21 12:22 PM, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
I don't want to create a UEFI Secure boot, since I have no way to pay for the expensive process of getting an official signature for the kernels I build from kernel.org source code. Kernels are about 10M in size, and the ramdisk.lzma is about 30M with supporting file system that then runs in Ram. In contrast the Fedora live Image is about 2G in size, and doesn't include a number of packages that are needed for the disk imaging.
Is there a reason you can't use the Fedora kernel? That would give you full secure boot support. What different options are you using for your kernel?
Have you looked at a Fedora bootable flash drive to see where the files are?
On 9 Sep 2021 at 19:16, Samuel Sieb wrote:
Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org From: Samuel Sieb samuel@sieb.net Date sent: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 19:16:51 -0700 Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 9/9/21 12:22 PM, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
I don't want to create a UEFI Secure boot, since I have no way to pay for the expensive process of getting an official signature for the kernels I build from kernel.org source code. Kernels are about 10M in size, and the ramdisk.lzma is about 30M with supporting file system that then runs in Ram. In contrast the Fedora live Image is about 2G in size, and doesn't include a number of packages that are needed for the disk imaging.
Is there a reason you can't use the Fedora kernel? That would give you full secure boot support. What different options are you using for your kernel?
I have done a test. I can boot from the Fedora 34 live cd I have setup in Virtual box. 2G boot file. I've found that there are 23 packages that are not included in the live cd setup, so have to install them.
dnf install ncftp nano dialog fsarchiver aespipe bwm-ng dd_rescue ddrescue f3 hexedit iperf fuse-sshfs strace testdisk hdparm dmidecode nvme-cli gpm rpcbind partclone udpcast
Then there is the g4l script plus a copy little programs and scripts. Did a comparison of the /bin and /sbin directories to see what wasn't there. Might be some of those packages that are not needed by main script, but the main script is 2460 lines long, so would have to go thru it.
Found files from 2006 where I had some systems that wouldn't boot from the G4L kernels, but booted fine with Knoppix live cd. Had created a simpler setup that worked with that. Booting the knoppix, and then just extacting the missing programs. But a lot had been added since 2006.
So, going from a simple boot with a 10M kernel and 30M filesystem running in ram versus booting to a 2G filesystem and having to add stuff requiring the internet.
Not clear why the grub2-install fails with the efi message about not supporting secure boot, since I am not looking for efi secure boot??
Have you looked at a Fedora bootable flash drive to see where the files are?
I've looked at the /boot efi files on the Fedora 34 live CD, but they seem to be locked for the secure boot enabled Fedora kernels, and wouldn't work with my kernels, since they don't have the signature..
Will keep looking, but the answer may be it is beyond my abilities. But guess if memtest can't create a setup for EFI, it can't be easy.
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On 9/9/21 10:21 PM, Michael D. Setzer II wrote:
On 9 Sep 2021 at 19:16, Samuel Sieb wrote:
Is there a reason you can't use the Fedora kernel? That would give you full secure boot support. What different options are you using for your kernel?
I have done a test. I can boot from the Fedora 34 live cd I have setup in Virtual box. 2G boot file. I've found that there are 23 packages that are not included in the live cd setup, so have to install them.
[snip]
So, going from a simple boot with a 10M kernel and 30M filesystem running in ram versus booting to a 2G filesystem and having to add stuff requiring the internet.
I don't think you're getting my point and aren't actually answering my questions.
What is special about the kernel you're compiling that the Fedora kernel won't work? Don't say anything about EFI.
You have an initramfs already. Why can't you keep that, but replace the kernel modules with the ones from Fedora?
This would get you a fully functional EFI boot that would even work with secure boot enabled.
On 9 Sep 2021 at 22:51, Samuel Sieb wrote:
Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? To: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org From: Samuel Sieb samuel@sieb.net Date sent: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 22:51:43 -0700 Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 9/9/21 10:21 PM, Michael D. Setzer II wrote:
On 9 Sep 2021 at 19:16, Samuel Sieb wrote:
Is there a reason you can't use the Fedora kernel? That would give you full secure boot support. What different options are you using for your kernel?
I have done a test. I can boot from the Fedora 34 live cd I have setup in Virtual box. 2G boot file. I've found that there are 23 packages that are not included in the live cd setup, so have to install them.
[snip]
So, going from a simple boot with a 10M kernel and 30M filesystem running in ram versus booting to a 2G filesystem and having to add stuff requiring the internet.
I don't think you're getting my point and aren't actually answering my questions.
What is special about the kernel you're compiling that the Fedora kernel won't work? Don't say anything about EFI.
Not sure? The Fedora Kernels are built to use Systemd and Selinux, so not sure how they would interact with the g4l's ramdisk.lzma file. With the G4L kernel, it includes almost all available disk and nic devices the kernel offers since it is meant to boot and support whatever the hardware has, and haven't had issues from users about not supporting things very often, and have resolved the few issues. The g4l ramdisk.lzma has no gnome or other desktop environment. Is just a text based system using dialog interface.. Guess I could setup a option in 40_custom, that used the rescue kernel, since it would be the only one that would come close to supporting more hardware. Once change a machine from an old IDE hard disk to a new SATA hard disk. Imaged the IDE to the SATA and everything was identical, but it would not boot from the SATA drive.. Turned out the default kernel didn't include the SATA support, since the machine didn't have an SATA drive at the time. Don't know if there was a resue kernel on disk at time, but ended up booting back from the old IDE drive, and went thru a complex process to build a new initrd that include the SATA controller. Was then able to copy it to the SATA disk, and it booted just fine. I could boot from the Fedora CD, and could see the SATA drive, since it had all the different hard disk support, but the current one did not. As an example this notebooks current rescue initramfs is over twice the since the current booting initramfs.
106180650 May 7 23:45 initramfs-0-rescue-189711f94e78436d9618b891a8fce70e .img 48724393 Sep 9 17:42 initramfs-5.13.14-100.fc33.x86_64.img
The g4l current ramdisk.lzma 28244926 Sep 9 17:35 ramdisk.lzma
Comparing kernel files. 10596624 May 7 23:44 vmlinuz-0-rescue-189711f94e78436d9618b891a8fce70e 10865648 Aug 13 07:42 vmlinuz-5.13.10-100.fc33.x86_64
G4l kernel file 9818816 Sep 9 17:35 bz5x13.15
You have an initramfs already. Why can't you keep that, but replace the kernel modules with the ones from Fedora?
The G4L has all the modules built into the kernel, versus have them as loadable one. The CD version has multiple kernels include in case default one doesn't work with hardware, hopefully one of the others will. Since the kernels contain all the modules built in, doesn't require created different directories for each kernel.
Current CD version has the following kernel options. LABEL bz5x4.144 MENU LABEL ^A: bz5x4.144 x86 09-03-2021 TEXT HELP Kernel 5x4.144 from Kernel.org ENDTEXT LINUX bz5x4.144 APPEND initrd=ramdisk.lzma root=/dev/ram0 LABEL bz5x10.63 MENU LABEL ^B: bz5x10.63 x86 09-08-2021 TEXT HELP Kernel 5x10.63 from Kernel.org ENDTEXT LINUX bz5x10.63 APPEND initrd=ramdisk.lzma root=/dev/ram0 LABEL bz5x12.19 MENU LABEL ^C: bz5x12.19 x86 07-20-2021 TEXT HELP Kernel 5x12.19 from Kernel.org ENDTEXT LINUX bz5x12.19 APPEND initrd=ramdisk.lzma root=/dev/ram0 LABEL bz5x13.15 MENU LABEL ^D: bz5x13.15 x86 09-08-2021 MENU DEFAULT TEXT HELP Kernel 5x13.15 from Kernel.org ENDTEXT LINUX bz5x13.15 APPEND initrd=ramdisk.lzma root=/dev/ram0 LABEL Failsafe MENU LABEL ^J: Failsafe Menu TEXT HELP Switch between menu with/without failsafe options ENDTEXT CONFIG failsafe.cfg APPEND initrd=ramdisk.lzma root=/dev/ram0 LABEL bz5x14.1 MENU LABEL ^K: bz5x14.1 x86 09-08-2021 TEXT HELP Kernel 5x14.1 from Kernel.org ENDTEXT LINUX bz5x14.1 APPEND initrd=ramdisk.lzma root=/dev/ram0
The flash if created by copying the iso to flash would have all these kernels. If the g4l-lite file is used to create a flash using grub4dos it only has the default kernel as an option, and is thus much smaller.
Adding it directly as a boot option on the regular grub2 just requires putting the bzxxx kernel file and the ramdisk.lzma file in the boot directory.
Then have the following lines in 40_custom menuentry G4L { linux /bz5x13.15 root=/dev/ram0 telnetd=yes initrd /ramdisk.lzma } and using grub2-mkconfig command.
This would get you a fully functional EFI boot that would even work with secure boot enabled. _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On 9/9/21 11:39 PM, Michael D. Setzer II wrote:
Not sure? The Fedora Kernels are built to use Systemd and Selinux, so not sure how they would interact with the g4l's ramdisk.lzma file. With the G4L kernel, it includes
systemd is just an init system, the kernel doesn't have anything specific for it. Whatever you're using for init will still work. I think if you don't load a policy, then selinux is irrelevant as well, but you can disable it with a command line option if necessary.
almost all available disk and nic devices the kernel offers since it is meant to boot and support whatever the hardware has, and haven't had issues from users about not supporting things very often, and have resolved the
The Fedora kernel includes support for most devices as well. You could compare the configs to see what's different.
few issues. The g4l ramdisk.lzma has no gnome or other desktop environment. Is just a text based system using dialog interface..
This isn't relevant.
Guess I could setup a option in 40_custom, that used the
Why do you keep mentioning this, it's also irrelevant. You're not using grub mkconfig (or you shouldn't be).
rescue kernel, since it would be the only one that would come close to supporting more hardware. Once change a
[snip]
As an example this notebooks current rescue initramfs is over twice the since the current booting initramfs.
The rescue initramfs includes a lot of (all?) the kernel modules instead of just the ones needed for the current system. But the kernel is the same in both cases. The rescue kernel is not special. In your ramdisk, you should include all the kernel modules.
The G4L has all the modules built into the kernel, versus have them as loadable one. The CD version has multiple kernels include in case default one doesn't work with hardware, hopefully one of the others will. Since the kernels contain all the modules built in, doesn't require created different directories for each kernel.
There is no need to have the modules built into the kernel.
Current CD version has the following kernel options.
Is it really beneficial to have that many kernels?
Well, tired it and get a kernel panic... Booted a notebook that has fully updated fedora 33, and went to the 3rd kernel on the list and used edit option. Changed the initrd line to use the g4l ramdisk.lzma as the initrd and it comes up with a kernel panic..
Could just be that Fedora kernel doesn't include support for the lzma compression, but the panic message didn't give much detail, and it didn't even go thru a whole screen of line. I went with lzma compression, since it greatly reduces the size of ramdisk, and my kernels have no issues since they have the support built in. Did try using xz compression onces, but kernel got an error with the uncompression, so assumed the kernels xz support didn't include something?? Did note the size difference between the lzma compressed ramdisk and xz compressed was small.
So, at least for a simple change of the initrd results in kernel panic.
On 10 Sep 2021 at 0:02, Samuel Sieb wrote:
Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? To: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org From: Samuel Sieb samuel@sieb.net Date sent: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 00:02:55 -0700 Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 9/9/21 11:39 PM, Michael D. Setzer II wrote:
Not sure? The Fedora Kernels are built to use Systemd and Selinux, so not sure how they would interact with the g4l's ramdisk.lzma file. With the G4L kernel, it includes
systemd is just an init system, the kernel doesn't have anything specific for it. Whatever you're using for init will still work. I think if you don't load a policy, then selinux is irrelevant as well, but you can disable it with a command line option if necessary.
almost all available disk and nic devices the kernel offers since it is meant to boot and support whatever the hardware has, and haven't had issues from users about not supporting things very often, and have resolved the
The Fedora kernel includes support for most devices as well. You could compare the configs to see what's different.
few issues. The g4l ramdisk.lzma has no gnome or other desktop environment. Is just a text based system using dialog interface..
This isn't relevant.
Guess I could setup a option in 40_custom, that used the
Why do you keep mentioning this, it's also irrelevant. You're not using grub mkconfig (or you shouldn't be).
rescue kernel, since it would be the only one that would come close to supporting more hardware. Once change a
[snip]
As an example this notebooks current rescue initramfs is over twice the since the current booting initramfs.
The rescue initramfs includes a lot of (all?) the kernel modules instead of just the ones needed for the current system. But the kernel is the same in both cases. The rescue kernel is not special. In your ramdisk, you should include all the kernel modules.
The G4L has all the modules built into the kernel, versus have them as loadable one. The CD version has multiple kernels include in case default one doesn't work with hardware, hopefully one of the others will. Since the kernels contain all the modules built in, doesn't require created different directories for each kernel.
There is no need to have the modules built into the kernel.
Current CD version has the following kernel options.
Is it really beneficial to have that many kernels? _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On 9/10/21 12:36 AM, Michael D. Setzer II wrote:
Well, tired it and get a kernel panic... Booted a notebook that has fully updated fedora 33, and went to the 3rd kernel on the list and used edit option. Changed the initrd line to use the g4l ramdisk.lzma as the initrd and it comes up with a kernel panic..
You are unlikely to be able to directly use the existing ramdisk with any arbitrary kernel. But what was the error message?
This may be a totally useless experience from another Dell computer, but ...
I was running an older Fedora on both a non-Dell desktop and a Dell Vostro laptop. I decided to do a fresh reinstall on the laptop. First, used the desktop to create an install flash drive (F34). Forget if I used mediawriter or dd, but should not matter.
The flash mounted fine on the desktop. Took it to the laptop, again mounted fine under the old Fedora. Tried to boot from the flash and could not see it at all no matter what bios boot options I tried.
Returned to the desktop and there was no problem booting from the flash drive. But no success on the laptop until...
I recalled a brief message "Press F12 to ..." So brief I had to <ctrl><alt><del> several times to get the rest that said something like "select boot device".
When I next rebooted and pressed F12, it gave a menu that included USB legacy boot, USB secure boot, and my hard drive.
Maybe the new Dell bios at your client needs something like that to USB boot.
On 10 Sep 2021 at 0:25, Jon LaBadie wrote:
Date sent: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 00:25:57 -0400 From: Jon LaBadie jonfu@jgcomp.com To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
This may be a totally useless experience from another Dell computer, but ...
I was running an older Fedora on both a non-Dell desktop and a Dell Vostro laptop. I decided to do a fresh reinstall on the laptop. First, used the desktop to create an install flash drive (F34). Forget if I used mediawriter or dd, but should not matter.
The flash mounted fine on the desktop. Took it to the laptop, again mounted fine under the old Fedora. Tried to boot from the flash and could not see it at all no matter what bios boot options I tried.
Returned to the desktop and there was no problem booting from the flash drive. But no success on the laptop until...
I recalled a brief message "Press F12 to ..." So brief I had to <ctrl><alt><del> several times to get the rest that said something like "select boot device".
When I next rebooted and pressed F12, it gave a menu that included USB legacy boot, USB secure boot, and my hard drive.
Maybe the new Dell bios at your client needs something like that to USB boot.
On my Dell machine, the F12 key does the boot option menu, and it will show the Legacy options and the UEFI options if a UEFI flash is installed.
The user has gotten into the bios to boot the G4L from Dell 3070 machines, but the new Dell 3080 machine don't have the options available. It is possible that there is some complex process to enable the options that is different from the 3070 to the 3080. Don't have any access to either.
Tried to go to Dell website to ask a Dell Tech, but it requires a special code off a machine to be able to get to first step. Asked the user to ask Dell, but haven't heard back yet.
Had a Dell PowerEdge server like 20 years ago. Went to install Windows NT 2000 on it. System had 3 SCSI hard drives in a very fancy 6 bay setup. Booting up from the windows NT 2000 CD, and it came up with message that no hard drives found, but I could see the 3 drives sitting there with all the green lights on and spinning just fine. Had to do some research, and found the NT CD didn't include the Perc 3 SCSI controller the Dell was using for the fancy server. Had to find it on the internet, and put the driver on a 3 1/2" floopy disk. Then boot from the NT CD, and press F8 (or other key), to be able to add the Perc 3 driver and then it saw the drive and install. Later I but some other disk in machine, and the Fedora CD at time had no problem seeing the Drives. Wasn't impressed with the $8,000 Dell server. Had $2,000 generic machines that were faster, but didn't have the 3 power supplies or other fancy bells.
In high school in mid 70s, my school had a 1963 IBM 1130 with 4K of Ram, and punch card. No display, but a teletype console. Removalable 5M hard disk. So come a long way. Thanks for the reply. Have a great day.
-- Jon H. LaBadie jonfu@jgcomp.com _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
On 2021-09-09 5:04 a.m., Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
Does anyone know of a process to make a UEFI USB Boot that actual works using Fedora??
1. Format your flash drive with a GPT partition table and a FAT32 partition. 2. Extract the tarball at https://bit.ly/3npBP0r into that partition. (Sorry, I can't give the real link or an upstream spam filter will block the email. The file is at filebin.) 3. Boot it.
It uses the Fedora kernel and I included the modules. However, because you have no process to load the modules when necessary, networking won't work automatically. You can either try using your static kernel or else include something like udev to automatically load modules as needed.
I didn't want to share a file from any personal servers. That link will expire in 6 days.
It's very simple though. I just used the F34 installer image and removed almost everything. I kept the EFI directory and added the kernel and repacked the g4l initramfs with the kernel modules added to it.
Thanks. I've downloaded it, and will take a look. Have contacted the GNU Grub developer, and asked. Will see if they have an option that might work. Thanks.
On 12 Sep 2021 at 0:54, Samuel Sieb wrote:
From: Samuel Sieb samuel@sieb.net Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Date sent: Sun, 12 Sep 2021 00:54:09 -0700 Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 2021-09-09 5:04 a.m., Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
Does anyone know of a process to make a UEFI USB Boot that actual works using Fedora??
- Format your flash drive with a GPT partition table and a FAT32 partition.
- Extract the tarball at https://bit.ly/3npBP0r into that partition.
(Sorry, I can't give the real link or an upstream spam filter will block the email. The file is at filebin.) 3. Boot it.
It uses the Fedora kernel and I included the modules. However, because you have no process to load the modules when necessary, networking won't work automatically. You can either try using your static kernel or else include something like udev to automatically load modules as needed.
I didn't want to share a file from any personal servers. That link will expire in 6 days.
It's very simple though. I just used the F34 installer image and removed almost everything. I kept the EFI directory and added the kernel and repacked the g4l initramfs with the kernel modules added to it. _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Good news Bad News.. Download and tested and have a mixed set of results. Yes, your setup does boot you kernel and the g4l.img file. Not sure if your g4l.img file is just an uncompressed version of the ramdisk.lzma. 62469461 Sep 12 16:40 g4l.img 28325385 Sep 11 20:19 ramdisk.lzma
If something else, please let me know.
As you said, it comes up with no network support, so the problem would be how to get all the ethernet support added, and don't know what all hardware for disk is included.
You grub.cfg file had some options the other ones I tried didn't. The did just use linux and initrd without the efi options.
I tried some other things, but leads to more questions.
Created a menuentry to try loading my kernel file, but still using your g4l.img file. But ended with just getting a blank screen. Just to fun, I added echo lines before and after the commands to see if it was actually doing anything. Results - I got all the echos. Echo before loading /bz5x13.15 Echo before loading /g4l.img and echo done after it??
So, it seems to be loading the kernel and g4l.img, but doesn't display any output.
Perhaps the efi puts the video in some mode the standard kernel doesn't support?? Found a page that talked about efi not supporting vga? Tried adding debug option to kernel lines, but neither with your kernel or mine did it produce any additional output??
So, Problem of getting network support for the vmlinuz or getting my kernels to work with the efi video mode??
Thanks again. One step forward, One step back.
On 12 Sep 2021 at 0:54, Samuel Sieb wrote:
From: Samuel Sieb samuel@sieb.net Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Date sent: Sun, 12 Sep 2021 00:54:09 -0700 Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 2021-09-09 5:04 a.m., Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
Does anyone know of a process to make a UEFI USB Boot that actual works using Fedora??
- Format your flash drive with a GPT partition table and a FAT32 partition.
- Extract the tarball at https://bit.ly/3npBP0r into that partition.
(Sorry, I can't give the real link or an upstream spam filter will block the email. The file is at filebin.) 3. Boot it.
It uses the Fedora kernel and I included the modules. However, because you have no process to load the modules when necessary, networking won't work automatically. You can either try using your static kernel or else include something like udev to automatically load modules as needed.
I didn't want to share a file from any personal servers. That link will expire in 6 days.
It's very simple though. I just used the F34 installer image and removed almost everything. I kept the EFI directory and added the kernel and repacked the g4l initramfs with the kernel modules added to it. _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
More interesting things in testing. I can boot from the flash, and it loads my kernel and your g4l.img file with no problem, except of course have a blank screen... How do I know it works. First thing I tried was after waiting a while, pressed enter a number of times that will eventual bring it to a command prompt. At that point, nothing but a blank screen with the echo messages I added. Type eject on the keyboard, and the cd rom ejects, so assumed it was working. Then modified the menu option to add the telnet=y option. That has it automatically load the telnetd program as start of the boot process. Booted from a regular g4l usb, and found system gets ip 192.168.16.105. Rebooted with the UEFI flash, and again tried the eject, and it worked. Then took my notebook, and telnet 192.168.16.105 gets me into the machine? Looked at dmesg, but it didn't have info on video. G4L didn't include lshw, so I had to use ncftp to connect to my notebook, and download the lshw program. lshw -c video reports this? *-display UNCLAIMED description: VGA compatible controller product: 4th Generation Core Processor Family Integrated Graphics Controller vendor: Intel Corporation physical id: 2 bus info: pci@0000:00:02.0 version: 06 width: 64 bits clock: 33MHz capabilities: msi pm vga_controller bus_master cap_list configuration: latency=0 resources: memory:f7800000-f7bfffff memory:e0000000-efffffff ioport:f000(size=64) memory:c0000-dffff -bash-5.0#
Looked at lshw | more and don't find any other video info?? The only reference to efi was this line, and another line had word Definition in it. capabilities: pci pnp upgrade shadowing cdboot bootselect edd int13floppy1200 int13floppy720 int13floppy2880 int5printscreen int9keyboard int14serial int17printer acpi usb biosbootspecification netboot uefi
So, one could boot from the UEFI Flash, but then would need to telnet into it from another machine. Did this in the past when access machine remotely, could change default boot to the g4l option in grub, then telnet in, and make image..
Added some kernel option about graphics for EFI, but even with that still get a blank screen?? These where the changes to the .config file. < CONFIG_DRM_PANEL_ORIENTATION_QUIRKS=y < CONFIG_FB_CMDLINE=y < CONFIG_FB_NOTIFY=y < CONFIG_FB=y < CONFIG_FIRMWARE_EDID=y < CONFIG_FB_BOOT_VESA_SUPPORT=y < CONFIG_FB_CFB_FILLRECT=y < CONFIG_FB_CFB_COPYAREA=y < CONFIG_FB_CFB_IMAGEBLIT=y < CONFIG_FB_MODE_HELPERS=y < < CONFIG_FB_VESA=y < CONFIG_FB_EFI=y
So, must need something else?? Thanks again. Always more to learn.
On 12 Sep 2021 at 0:54, Samuel Sieb wrote:
From: Samuel Sieb samuel@sieb.net Subject: Re: Failure in gsetting up a UEFI USB Flash with Fedora 33?? To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Date sent: Sun, 12 Sep 2021 00:54:09 -0700 Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 2021-09-09 5:04 a.m., Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
Does anyone know of a process to make a UEFI USB Boot that actual works using Fedora??
- Format your flash drive with a GPT partition table and a FAT32 partition.
- Extract the tarball at https://bit.ly/3npBP0r into that partition.
(Sorry, I can't give the real link or an upstream spam filter will block the email. The file is at filebin.) 3. Boot it.
It uses the Fedora kernel and I included the modules. However, because you have no process to load the modules when necessary, networking won't work automatically. You can either try using your static kernel or else include something like udev to automatically load modules as needed.
I didn't want to share a file from any personal servers. That link will expire in 6 days.
It's very simple though. I just used the F34 installer image and removed almost everything. I kept the EFI directory and added the kernel and repacked the g4l initramfs with the kernel modules added to it. _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Short update. I know have the g4l booting via UEFI with my bz5x14.2d kernel and ramdisk.lzma. Had to basically add 100 lines to the .config file to load most of the framebuffer drivers and to setup the fbconsole.. But it now boots with video output, and even has the default linux penguins logo show up. Screen is at a higher resolution that needs, but think that is OK. Makes kernel a little larger. 9795552 Sep 9 17:09 bz5x14.2 10172032 Sep 13 10:11 bz5x14.2d So, increased kernel 376480 bytes. Need to check if the bz5x14.2d kernel will work with regular non-efi setup boot. Guess it just could be a simple process.
-
Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. -
George N. White III -
John Mellor -
Jon LaBadie -
Jonathan Billings -
Matthew Miller -
Michael D. Setzer II -
Samuel Sieb -
Tom Horsley