Boot Windows From Syslinux Efi
Jump to Choosing a boot loader - A large number of UEFI boot loader implementations are. Tails has been using syslinux forever, and we are pretty. A variety of machines will happily boot a custom bzImage via PXE in legacy mode using syslinux. In UEFI mode, one of these machines and a newer UEFI only board get assigned an IP address, TFTP syslinx.efi from the server and then freeze. Now I'm not quite sure why the freeze. There are no further TFTP requests as seen when using pxelinux.0.
From what I have catched up to, setting up uefi boot with syslinux can be done like this: - A 'EFI/boot' folder for EFI boot, installed manually: - Copy all *.c32 objects from '/usr/lib/syslinux/efi64/' - Copy 'syslinux.efi' to 'bootx64.efi' in same folder as above - Edit 'syslinux.cfg' in 'EFI/boot' But am unable to find '/usr/lib/syslinux/efi64/' or anything efi64 related at all in Centos 7 after installing the syslinux package (yum install syslinux). I also tried find / -name '*efi*' grep sys and found nothing of what I should be finding. Where to find?
Megadrive roms full collection. Syslinux-efi is a great option for PXE booting a UEFI-mode client, but the current package is not signed and so cannot be used when secure-boot is enable. It would be very helpful if there was, say, a `syslinux- signed- efi` package similar to `linux- signed- generic`, etc. For what it's worth, System76 is working on switching all its products to UEFI, and this is one of the last blockers for our imaging system (we don't want customers to be confused/concerned about the 'booting in insecure mode' message). Mathieu: also, to clarify because I don't think my original description was clear enough: We want to have our firmware in UEFI mode with secure boot on by default, yet we want to avoid having to toggle secure boot off in order to image, the toggle it back on prior to shipping to the customer.
The 'Booting in insecure mode message' I'm talking about is the result of having secure-boot turned off at the firmware level, nothing to do with the operating system. So for us, it would still be hugely helpful to have a signed EFI syslinux.
Well, part of the reason for using syslinux over grub is our imaging system still needs to support PXE booting legacy BIOS systems, and syslinux is what we've used historically for that. The other part is that back when I last tried using grub as a PXE bootloader, I wasn't able to get it working, although I haven't tried in a while. But we do have everything working with syslinux now, minus the signing.
As far as whether we want it signed with a with Microsoft Key or Canonical Key, I'm not totally clear on the details there, but I think we want it signed with whatever key is currently used to sign the shim and the kernels. I was under the impression that the Canonical Key was signed by the same CA that the Microsoft Key is, and that's why you can still install Ubuntu on systems with secure boot enabled that originally shipped with Windows. Mathieu: my goof. I thought the 'Booting in insecure mode' message was actually coming from the firmware, didn't realize it was coming from shim.
We confirmed that the shim package in proposed indeed fixes this behaviour. And this also unblocks us when it comes to having a signed syslinux. We're not necessarily super attached to shipping with secure boot enabled (although we would like the option). What we are attached to is shipping UEFI systems and not having the 'Booting in insecure mode' message cause customers needless concern and confusion. Thanks for clearing this up for me, even though it took a bit for it to sink in!:D.