Media image names - Document & rationalise.

[Julian H. Stacey]

Ed Maste wrote:
> On 1 October 2014 10:37, Glen Barber <gjb at freebsd.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 03:58:24PM +0200, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> >> Maybe there was an explanation of -uefi- on a mail list. One can
> >> guess: for [some?] newer machines try uefi. But could we put a more
> >> exact purpose of uefi images in a README ?
> >>
> >
> > The UEFI images will be documented in the release announcement email,
> > because they are specific to the 10.1-RELEASE cycle.  11.0-RELEASE will
> > have the functionality in the default installation medium.
> 
> To be clear, the existing, legacy-only images are built the same way
> as they always have been.  The reason there are separate -uefi- images
> is to avoid accidental regression in legacy-only boot support.
> 
> The 10.1 -uefi- images (as well as the 11.0 images) are actually
> dual-mode, and should boot in both UEFI and legacy configurations.
> I'm interested in receiving test reports of installations using the
> -uefi- images, in both UEFI and legacy boot configurations.
> 
> (Technical detail: The image contains legacy MBR boot code, and is
> partitioned using the MBR scheme. One of the MBR partitions is an EFI
> system partition of type 0xEF.  Legacy boot uses the MBR, while UEFI
> loads the first-stage loader /EFI/BOOT/BOOTX64.EFI.  Both cases use
> the same root file system and boot the same kernel.)

Thanks Ed, good to know :-)

Cheers,
Julian
-- 
Julian Stacey, BSD Linux Unix C Sys Eng Consultant Munich http://berklix.com
 Indent previous with "> ".  Interleave reply paragraphs like a play script.
 Send plain text, not quoted-printable, HTML, base64, or multipart/alternative.
		ShellShock - http://www.berklix.com/~jhs/bash/