libreplanet-ca-qc
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Libreplanet-ca-qc] Fwd: F17-Alpha DVD basic install success with commen


From: Michael Faille
Subject: [Libreplanet-ca-qc] Fwd: F17-Alpha DVD basic install success with comments
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 21:22:29 -0400

De l'info sur le UEFI/EFI
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Peter Gueckel <address@hidden>
Date: Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 6:31 PM
Subject: Re: F17-Alpha DVD basic install success with comments
To: address@hidden


Adam Williamson wrote:

> At the user level it's pretty simple: it's a modern replacement for
> BIOS. It's an entirely new system firmware standard for PCs.
>
> The most user-noticeable features of UEFI are probably secure boot
> (which has been discussed ad infinitum: the important thing here is not
> to confuse UEFI as a whole with the secure boot feature, which is one
> small feature of UEFI and can be optional, as it is on all current
> implementations. Some don't even have secure boot. The press often makes
> this mistake) and the EFI boot manager, which puts the boot manager in
> the system firmware where it belongs. No more faffing around with an MBR
> bootloader for every disk and possible chainloading of bootloaders in
> root partitions. With UEFI, broadly, OSes install somewhere and then
> tell the system firmware where they are, and the system firmware gives
> you the list of OSes to choose from.
>
> Many new systems and motherboards have a UEFI-based firmware, now. But
> because many OSes don't really support UEFI, UEFI implementations almost
> always have a BIOS compatibility mode (sometimes referred to as CSM) and
> almost always actually default to using it; you have to do something
> specific to boot anything EFI natively. (Laptops with pre-installed OSes
> can be an exception to this, there are a few which boot Windows x64
> natively via EFI, I believe).
>
> I tend to use 'EFI' and 'UEFI' interchangeably (see above!), which is a
> bad habit. EFI originated as an Intel thing, at which time it was called
> EFI. It then got proposed as an industry standard, accepted, and
> somewhat revised, since when it's known as UEFI. Strictly, saying EFI
> should really refer to the original Intel implementation only.

Very informative! Thanks for taking the time.

--
test mailing list
address@hidden
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]