So let me get this straight, they want to boot a MS signed bootloader which has very strict rules, then they chainload their own bootloader which is very liberal about what it loads. Wasn't this whole signing thing supposed to make security better?
Seems to prove that the whole idea from the start is flawed.
I dont get why this Secured Boot and requiring Microsoft key doesn't bring an Anti-trust suit againt MS. I mean, they're basically locking out people from using other OS unless these OS have paid MS for the signing. That's a hell of case!
I just wanted to say, fuck canonical for doing that, I just trying fedora... so thats the point where I beginn to switch here... but then I read something that the redhat guys go the same way... was I wrong about them complaining against it loudest, wasnt it them who are more free software guys than opensource or more serios opensource how you want to define that is subjective ^^
So where is the alternative, I dont want go back to gentoo or something like that... I dont want to use different software not because its better just because it is not gplv3, I want no tivoisation, I want gpl3, I use gpl3+ for my stuff...
It just sucks... I dont want to use a very old debian releases but I dont want a bleeding edge compile your stuff yourself distri... even arch linux what gets very much attention is not so complete... their AUR packages are often broken (see as example gnome-boxes)
Where is the alternative... we need a new maybe debian-based more free but closer to upstream versions linux alternative, that have much users, maybe it could be linux-mint debian edition or somthing like that, but there must work more people for that, or something like sidux for gnome-shell not for kde ^^
I hope something changes I dont want to use ubuntu anymore, because they made several desitions I do not agree to, and thats the point where it goes fo far for me, and then I read fedora does the same, unbelivable...
when i get some UEFI hardware I will put my own key on it. Then I can run whatever I want. And I can be sure it will only run stuff I signed. Sounds pretty handy for me. (Though as I am unlikely to audit all the code that I'd sign then i am probably not much more secure than currently)
Of course most folk don't want to mess around in their BIOS, so i am glad that the major distros work with the default keys.
(If someone makes some hardware where i cannot change the key then I would not buy it.)