IRC Logs for #crux-devel Friday, 2015-11-13

jaegerteK__: a bit more testing done tonight; it seems the precompiled elilo x86_64 efi executable that comes with the source works but building my own in crux 3.2 doesn't work02:01
jaegerNot sure if the gcc 5.2 issue is the problem or something else. removing -O2 doesn't fix it like wine02:01
*** deus_ex has quit IRC02:37
*** deus_ex has joined #crux-devel02:42
*** __mavric61 has quit IRC03:29
*** __mavric61 has joined #crux-devel03:31
frinnstis there any way for me to test it (without actually using efi?)07:35
frinnsthttps://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/3sjn1i/how_many_sysadmins_drive_a_car_with_a_manual/ <- haha lots of Subaru drivers :D08:23
frinnsti guess its a thing08:23
jaegerI had no idea, heh13:53
jaegeras for UEFI, you can test it in virtualbox easily enough13:54
frinnstbut all binaries "work", etc?13:55
frinnstno crashes or anything like that13:55
frinnst?13:55
jaegeraside from elilo, yeah13:56
jaegerelilo compiles fine as far as I can see but all I get when booting is a blank screen13:58
jaegeron both hardware and virtual machines13:58
frinnstany contact with upstream?14:03
frinnstThis project is orphaned, Debian dropped it in 2014, and RH & SUSE stopped using this tree (and feeding back change) long before that so no longer interested in working on it.14:04
frinnstguess there is no upstream14:04
frinnstis elilo required for something? as it does something grub-efi cant do?14:09
jaegerNo, it's not required, it's just a lot simpler than grub214:10
jaegerwell, I suppose that's only partly true now. grub2 can generate good (if bloated) configs now14:10
jaeger"grub-install /boot/efi && grub-mkconfig -o /boot/grub/grub.cfg" is all it requires now, pretty much14:11
jaegerand yeah, I think it's been abandoned upstream14:17
jaeger(elilo)14:17
rmullWhat about extlinux as a replacement?14:42
rmullI haven't used it, but it seems similarly simple14:43
frinnstit does efi?14:47
rmullah... uh, possibly not. Forgot about that detail.14:48
rmullI will confirm14:48
rmullHere's the Arch documentation on the topic: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Syslinux#UEFI_Systems14:49
rmullIt has "limitations" but I'm not sure how they compare to elilo14:49
jaegerI haven't tried extlinux15:01
rmullI don't have a (u)efi system15:04
jaegerVirtualBox supports it if you want to try it15:05
rmullI will look into it, but no commitment15:06
jaegerthanks15:14
rmullI can just use the install CD's kernel config, right?15:33
rmullI don't feel like tweaking anything just to test the bootloader15:33
*** hhepkgbjpvyiscgz has joined #crux-devel16:22
*** Workster has quit IRC16:22
*** Workster has joined #crux-devel16:22
*** dlcusa has joined #crux-devel18:00
dlcusa I'm not up on elio, but is rEFInd a possible alternative?18:00
jaegerpossibly18:29
jaegertheoretically any of the UEFI boot managers/loaders should work but elilo seems buggy in 3.2 and syslinux has never worked properly with UEFI18:35
*** dlcusa has left #crux-devel ("Leaving")20:11
frinnstbut the package on the iso (built under 3.1?) works?20:54
jaegerno21:02
jaegerthe 3.1 package works but the 3.2 package does not, either from the 3.2 ISO *or* built after installation of 3.221:03
jaegerI don't mind switching to grub2-efi on the ISO if necessary, we just went with elilo because it was simple... still curious if teK__ has better luck with it21:05

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.11.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!