[Linux-aus] What is LA's response to UEFI Secure Boot?

[Noel Butler]

Sunday Tongue in cheek

Sorry Brent, LA have been waaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyy toooooooooo
buuuusssssssssyyyyyyyyy trying to convince us all we need to change the
organisations name - no energy left to argue for real relevant things
that will affect us.

I just couldn't resist.


Noel
please send all flames to root at localhost

On Sun, 2012-08-05 at 09:33 +1000, Brent Wallis wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> 
> On Sunday, August 5, 2012, Matthew Lye wrote:
> 
>         Wasn't this done a year ago?
>         
> 
> 
> The last reference I can find on the LA site is from council meeting
> minutes dated 15/2/12:
> "
>         
>       * Secure Boot seems to have quietened down. Pursue?
>         Postponed.
>         
>         
>         
> A lot has happened tween times.
> Just wondering if a public statement was made or any further work done
> on the matter? 
>  Rgds
> BW
> 
> 
> 
> 
>         
>         
>          Leadership is responsibility, not privilege, Action, not
>         position, Guidance, not knowledge, and outcome, not
>         disposition.
>         <No trees were harmed during this transmission. However, a
>         great number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced>
>         
>         
>         
>         On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 11:35 PM, Brent Wallis
>         <brent.wallis at gmail.com> wrote:
>         
>                 Hi to All,
>                 
>                 
>                 
>                 What is our collective response to UEFI and secure
>                 boot?
>                 
>                 
>                 Canonical and RH have taken a position.
>                 The FSF seem to have taken an opposing view.
>                 
>                 
>                 Is it true?
>                 Could we be facing a situation where we could be
>                 locked out of a Linux install on current and future
>                 PC/ Laptop hardware?
>                 
>                 
>                 What impact will this have on servers systems?
>                 Rgds
>                 BW
>                 
>                 
>                 _______________________________________________
>                 linux-aus mailing list
>                 linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
>                 http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/linux-aus
>                 
>         
>         
>         
>  
> 
> 
>  
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-aus mailing list
> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
> http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/linux-aus


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/attachments/20120805/969be89b/attachment.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/attachments/20120805/969be89b/attachment.pgp