On 9/17/25 17:37, Steve Litt wrote:
> Kevin Chadwick via Dng said on Wed, 17 Sep 2025 10:56:26 +0100
> (GMT+01:00)
>
>> 17 Sept 2025 09:59:26 fraser via Dng <dng@???>:
>>
>>>> It's not harmful. The efi does not have to be right at the beginning
>>>> of the disk and does not need to be the first partition.
>>>>
>>>> I like to make a small partition in front of the esp for a bios grub
>>>> partition in case I ever want or need to boot the gpt disk in legacy
>>>> mode instead of uefi. It needs to be at least 1 MB and not have a
>>>> filesystem on it. I generally give it 2 MB. Partition type is ef02
>>>> in gdisk.
>> Maybe I have lost the thread of UEFI not being harmful but one
>> unforeseen problem that could never happen with legacy mbr due to it's
>> simplicity is that.
> [snip very real problem caused by UEFI only}
>
> Once again, UEFI is an overhypercomplexificenated solution to a problem
> that was solved 40 years ago.
>
> In this age of bind mounts, why would ANYBODY need more than 7
> partitions at early boot time? Wassamata, can't they write a
> shellscript to mount their "simply must have" 40 other partitions?
>
> "Oh, but we needed secure boot!"
>
> OK fine, for sure for sure, they need secure boot. Secure boot could
> have been a small, standalone part of the bios, compatible with *self
> signed* certs for those of us who don't completely trust Microsoft. But
> nooooo! Because in truth secure boot, as implemented today, is nothing
> more or less than Microsoft monopolism.
>
> Was the old MBR perfect? No.
>
> Is UEFI the solution? Hell no!

Moreover it doesn't solve the original problem, either. It was
originally designed to freeze Linux out.

--Curtis