Cure found for kernel updates

[Matthew Garrett]

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 08:10:40PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Thu, 15.05.14 18:33, Matthew Garrett (mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org) wrote:
> > 
> > I'm talking about the menu in the preferences pane inside OS X. The 
> > spec's requirement that we use VFAT would break that.
> 
> Well, having two ESPs, one in FAT, one in HFS+ is a blatant violation of
> EFI, and not what is done when windows is installed on a mac
> either... The pref panel doesn't really matter as there's a boot menu of
> the firmware you can use to boot your OSes.

Windows ends up with reduced access to the hardware. We do what OS X 
does, not what Windows does, because that's the only way to get (for 
example) working Thunderbolt.

> > Autodiscovery makes it impossible to pass additional options to other 
> > bootloaders. I don't think we care that much in general, but some users 
> > may have requirements for it. It'd be nice to have a common format to 
> > express that.
> 
> If you want to pass aditional options, then add a manual drop-in for
> it. The BLS supports EFI binaries just fine. And for MBR chainloading
> there isn't any sane way to pass parameters anyway...

What's the objection to specifying a mechanism for chainloading?

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org