Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/EFI: define and use EFI_DIR make variable, defaulting to /usr/lib64/efi

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 11:03 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > I noticed that (at least on Debian) grub uses /usr/lib/grub/<arch>-efi
> > and elilo uses /usr/lib/elilo.
> 
> It's definitely /usr/lib64/efi/elilo.efi on SLE11, so I'm afraid this
> really ins't well standardized (and hence an EFI_DIR override is
> warranted, yet settling on a proper default may be problematic).
> 
> > Does that mean we should be using /usr/lib/xen/efi rather than /usr/lib/efi?
> > 
> > What is the policy for EFI install location on RPM/LSB based systems?
> 
> Don't know.
> 
> >> > We already have EFI_MOUNTPOINT under xen/*, I think EFI_DIR under there
> >> > (or in config/*) is fine also.
> >> 
> >> That part wasn't controversial (if generally useful), but imo it
> >> shouldn't expand to an open-coded path (unless put into
> >> config/x86_64.mk).
> > 
> > I could live with that. Unlike LIBDIR, where getting it wrong can mean
> > things don't work, getting EFI_DIR wrong is merely ugly.
> 
> Not exactly - it might still mean that boot loader installation (and
> update) doesn't work anymore. But getting things consistent
> would be a one-time per-distro task, so ought to be manageable.

So is the upshot that the original patch is basically OK, subject to
settling on a reasonable default for EFI_DIR? With the proviso that
there's basically no standardisation of this stuff and every distro
seems to be choosing a different path?

/usr/lib64/efi seems as good as anything. Suitable alternatives might
be /usr/{lib,lib64}/xen/efi/...

Ian.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel