debian grub2: update efi file name to align with symlink name #217
Conversation
jklare
commented
Mar 24, 2023
jklare
commented
- the files with the path grub2/bootx64.efi do not exist on a ubuntu 20.04 installation with foreman 3.6.0
- during the foreman_proxy netboot setup, symlinks for the grub2 pxe efi files with the name grub2/shim.efi are created here https://github.com/theforeman/puppet-foreman_proxy/blob/1a42903ead90fa9622ac123511e5b5f9eece8f79/manifests/tftp/netboot.pp#L56-L76
- this change aligns the dhcpd bootfile path with the settings already used for RedHat distributions by also using the symlink created and fixes the current issue of non existent files with the name grub2/bootx64.efi
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some research (since I'm not well known in this area) links to https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/565615/efi-boot-bootx64-efi-vs-efi-ubuntu-grubx64-efi-vs-boot-grub-x86-64-efi-gru. That tells me:
This is the only bootloader pathname that the UEFI firmware on 64-bit X86 systems will look for without any pre-existing NVRAM boot settings, so this is what you want to use on removable media.
So that's probably why this default is here. Since Debian 10 grub-efi-amd64-bin contains /usr/lib/grub/x86_64-efi/monolithic/grubx64.efi and looks like what we actually want. So I'm wondering if the netboot class should link/copy /usr/lib/grub/x86_64-efi/monolithic/grubx64.efi instead of calling grub-mkimage.
I didn't check Ubuntu's history, but at least Ubuntu 20.04 has the same file structure.
* the files with the path grub2/bootx64.efi do not exist on a ubuntu 20.04 installation with foreman 3.6.0 * this change updates the path used to grub2/grubx64.efi and grub2/grubia32.efi respectively Signed-off-by: Jan Klare <jan.klare@bisdn.de> Co-authored-by: Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden <ewoud@kohlvanwijngaarden.nl>
|
Thanks @ekohl for all the research and help, i updated the commits accordingly. |
