On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 05:33:18AM +0200, Edward Bartolo wrote:
> Struggling with vendors that cater mostly for MS Windows users who
> don't really care about Secure Boot being disabled or not, is not the
> way that leads to an available solution. Such vendors are far too
> powerful to bow to the pressures of insignificant pressure groups like
> 'old fashioned' Linux users who do not want to use a 'modern
> distribution'. What I would do, is dedicate a small partition to hold
> a distribution that can actually boot in Secure Mode and I would use
> that to manage my bootloader.
>
> You have the choice of at least two major distributions that work
> under Secure Boot. These are Ubuntu and Debian.
>
> This solution was what I did when GRUB 2 started to behave obstinately
> refusing to install its first stage when completely stripped of an
> operating system.

Except Debian doesn't support Secure Mode yet...


--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Laws we want back: Poland, Dz.U. 1921 nr.30 poz.177 (also Dz.U.
⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ 1920 nr.11 poz.61): Art.2: An official, guilty of accepting a gift
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ or another material benefit, or a promise thereof, [in matters
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ relevant to duties], shall be punished by death by shooting.