HELP: UEFI/ZFS Boot failure: Ignoring Boot000A: Only one DP found

[Toomas Soome]

> On 27 Aug 2019, at 08:08, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2019, 5:32 PM Rebecca Cran <rebecca at bsdio.com <mailto:rebecca at bsdio.com>> wrote:
> 
>> On 8/26/19 5:22 AM, O. Hartmann wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> the other thing is the weird Lenovo handling of the UEFI vars. The only
>> way to
>>> boot the E540 (after(!) disabling _BEARSSL in src.conf and rebuilding
>>> everything) was to set the loader's name to EFI/BOOT/BOOTx64.efi.
>> Setting the
>>> variable to contain EFI/BOOT/loader.efi failed as well as setting
>>> EFI/FreeBSD/loader.efi.
>> 
>> 
>> I've been suggesting FreeBSD should install the loader as
>> \EFI\BOOT\BOOTx64.efi for a while (as long as there's not already a
>> different vendor's loader there), without much success. Hopefully this
>> finding can cause us to reconsider.
>> 
> 
> That's the first machine I've seen where you have to set the name like
> that... there is a larger story here and we are getting incomplete reports
> because it doesn't quite make sense yet...
> 
> But there are enough reasons not to do that by default. For one thing, it
> messes up rEFInd, or can. Windows doesn't install there. At most we should
> prompt for older machines.  We shouldn't mortgage our future to cope with a
> legacy we know will sunset soon...
> 
> Warner
> 

For me it is still confusing if this is path versus upper-lower capital chars. 

If that vendor is using suggestion from UEFI Spec 2.7A section 3.5.1.1 (page 91), then the file name should also end with .EFI. (and yes, I know, that section is talking about removable media).

Therefore the question is, does lenovo accept name like EFI/FREEBSD/LOADER.EFI? Or what form is used there for windows paths?

If we should or should not use EFI/BOOT path - perhaps the installer should prefer vendor path by default. But till there is confusion, there should be some notes in some documentation...

rgds,
toomas