[systemd-devel] Splitting sd-boot from systemd/bootctl for enabling sd-boot in Fedora

[Jóhann B. Guðmundsson]

On 30.4.2022 07:53, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
> On 30.4.2022 05:08, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
>> On 28.04.2022 10:54, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>>>> * systemd-boot is an additional bootloader, rather than replacing
>>>>    an existing one, thus increasing the attack surface.
>>> Hmm, what? "additional bootloader"? Are they suggesting you use grub
>>> to start sd-boot? I mean, you certainly could do that, but the only
>>> people I know who do that do that to patch around the gatekeeping that
>>> the shim people are doing. Technically the boot chain should either be
>>> [firmware → sd-boot → kernel] or [firmware → shim → sd-boot → kernel]
>>> (if you buy into the shim thing), and nothing else.
>>>
>> I guess "additional bootloader" in this context means that distribution
>> cannot use sd-boot as the only bootloader for obvious reason - it is EFI
>> only. So distribution would need to keep currently used bootloader
>> anyway.
>
>
> Distributions most certainly can become efi only if they chose to do 
> so, there nothing technical that stands in that way.
>
>
>> If current bootloader already works on platforms supported by
>> distribution, what is gained by adding yet another one?
>
> Freedom of *choice*
>
> If the distribution allows users the freedom to choose from a set of 
> components that the OS "made of" or runs, to fit the user use cases or 
> has targeted use cases ( which bootloaders such as syslinux, u-boot, 
> redboot etc. are aimed at ) then drawing the line at bootloaders makes 
> no sense.*
> *
>
> If the distribution does not allow users the freedom to choose, then 
> it makes no sense to support multiple variants of components that 
> provide same/similar function in the distribution.*
> *
>

On that note if you take the bug report [1] that has been cited in this 
thread then it's quite evident that Debian is not about the freedom of 
choice.

"We do not consider it valid to have a choice of boot loaders"

which immediately excludes ca 20+ Linux/(F)OSS boot loader projects and 
thus**discriminates against the person or group of persons behind those 
projects and even the person trying to contribute to Debian itself

"Hi

I'm rescinding this request. I've got a working prototype, but I don't 
know where this would go."


The distribution is not even about freedom of information, which 
prevents individuals from having the ability to seek and receive and 
impart information effectively. ( to understand the how and thus the why 
the conclusion was reached which for in this particular case *all* 
bootloaders projects could look at the dialog, learn from it and fix 
anything if it affected them or correct any misunderstanding that might 
be happening. )


"> Is this discussion public? Can you share it?

We unfortunately do not have a written record of it."

...


JBG
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/attachments/20220430/f08f8d58/attachment.htm>