i found out earlier this week that windows 8 will be using a secure bootloader (UEFI i think).
some more info suggested that this will then make linux incompatible with windows 8 machines (as in unable to run it natively)
thats about as much info as i have - i dont know a huge ammount bootloaders (enough to add another option, but thats about it), so what will happen now?
will linux have to adapt? will ther be some clever bootloader that will alow both linux and windows 8 to boot?
maybe virtualisation will start to become fundamental to multi-OS machines now - each OS runs in it’s own hypervisor space and wont interfer with each other.
discuss!
This was already discussed, and discussed over and over. You may use the search function of the forum and contribute to one of the (abundant) multiple (sic) threads about this. And to make a long story short, technically the UEFI requires a signature made available by the producers or it requires an opt out setting in the bios. And BTW the prospects for linux are the elimination of the necessity of the bootloader AFAIK.
The subject(s) have indeed been discussed in those two (2) threads. Should such existing discussion(s) preclude the OP from posting here, or starting a thread?
I doubt a reasonable reader may perceive two (2) threads as “abundant”. However, to determine the possible existence of “multiple” threads, I did an “advanced search” on the entire “openSUSE Forums” looking for the OP’s thread title (“Windows 8 Secure Bootloader”), and the search returned
http://thumbnails44.imagebam.com/15358/899363153574969.jpg](ImageBam)
providing a total of six (6) threads, and not containing the two referenced above. If a pre-requisite of thread creation on these fora is to perform an exhaustive search to preclude non-intentional duplication, many newer users will simply avoid posting. If occasional duplicative threads elicit a pedagogical chastisement, the inquisitive will tend to become silent.
I would rather sort through 100 duplicative threads from anyone who makes an effort to post than repress the free and unencumbered sharing of information and experience. When this forum has search facilities that reveal all (or, at least a great percentage of) the threads relating to a topic, then the duplicative threads may be lessened.
Aside from issues of forum protocol etc, personally I think Microsoft mandating that hardware suppliers ship PCs with UEFI Secure Boot enabled is going to cause problems. What’s more, I think the European Union needs to play a major part in ensuring that Microsoft and it’s partners provide a simple solution on grounds of there otherwise being an unfair monopolistic advantage. As a result, I have contacted via email two of my area’s MEPs and the relevant EU commissioner, expressing my concern. It’d be great if others did the same. I suspect many have, or at least I hope so!
2
Dear Sean. The answer is YES and NO. As usual it depends. As a rule of thumb, if you follow the forum regularly one should have seen the two threads, as they where very recent. Since this is a very popular theme these days, you are expected IMO to check with the search features at least with three sentences or word groups to have idea on what has been posted. I am sure windows 8, UEFI, bootloader, lockout should already do. I did not do any advanced research on the subject and with very! little effort I got the result.
If the thread you find on the question has been already opened and is very old (let us say 3 month or more? It may be worthwhile to post provided:
- you did bother to read the original thread (was the question already answered and solved?).
- you do have actually something new to join to the discussion and not 100 percent related to the original thread
- the original thread had no answer (this is O.K. and actually desirable).
If your post then has no answer you are expected / allowed to “BUMB” after two or three days (I personally would wait for a week) on the subject, means to post a follow up post in the same thread. Idea would be that you heighten the probability to get an answer by being again very visible in “new messages” and to let us say give a reinforcement of your request.
What people do not like at all and they will tell you or in some forum you are even banned is “cross posting” and double posting". In cross-posting the poster will post in different fora the same question causing an interesting problem. While e.g. in the first forum there are still people killing their brains to find a question on your problem, in the other it is already marked as solved. Just the author, once obtained the solution, nearly never bothers to mark all threads closed and to give the solution found. If you do not find an answer here I find it useful to mark the thread as “closed, transfered to another forum”.
If you post in multiple subgroups or the same thread content in the same group, you will speak about “double posting”. This is detrimental to the understanding and clearness of the forum. Why? Imagine there are already three threads about the (same!) problem. You will then find the solution for one of them. But the other threads will clutter around without closure. You said:
I would rather sort through 100 duplicative threads from anyone who makes an effort to post than repress the free and unencumbered sharing of information and experience.
Is that so? But the very user that you are defending here did rightly NOT want to bother to read through the 2 other duplicative threads to find if the information was somewhere. Leave aside 100 ones.
Nobody wants to repress anything here. If the users of the two precedent threads would have been given the possibility to post together their contributions would not have been lost and information would have been effectively shared, also experiences. Instead who already posted will not do this in a duplicate thread, his contribution will vanish in clutter and will be IMO silenced. It was a recall to have a look first. I apologize that the form of expression might have been “rude” but in the substance it was probably triggered by the bold* “discuss” *at the end of a thread that was the eight duplicate of a very popular and abundantly covered issue.
I am confident that now you understand my motivation better.
Regards.
