Bug #29690: foreman installer expects shimx64.efi but only shim.efi is installed - Installer - Foreman

Actions

Copy link

Bug #29690

closed

foreman installer expects shimx64.efi but only shim.efi is installed

Added by Carlos Silva about 5 years ago. Updated about 5 years ago.

Status:

Closed

Priority:

Normal

Assignee:

Lukas Zapletal

Category:

Foreman modules

Target version:

Foreman - 2.1.0

Difficulty:

Triaged:

Yes

Bugzilla link:

Pull request:

https://github.com/theforeman/puppet-foreman_proxy/pull/592

Fixed in Releases:

Foreman - 1.24.3, Foreman - 2.0.1, Foreman - 2.1.0

Found in Releases:

Red Hat JIRA:

Description

When trying to deploy a machine via discovery -> provision, a dhcp record is created pointing to boot shimx64.efi but that file isn't installed on the tftproot, only shim.efi.

TFTP Logs:
in.tftpd²¹⁵⁰⁷: RRQ from 192.168.1.93 filename grub2/shimx64.efi
in.tftpd²¹⁵⁰⁷: Client 192.168.1.93 File not found grub2/shimx64.efi

find /var/lib/tftpboot/grub2/
/var/lib/tftpboot/grub2/
/var/lib/tftpboot/grub2/grub.cfg
/var/lib/tftpboot/grub2/boot
/var/lib/tftpboot/grub2/grubx64.efi
/var/lib/tftpboot/grub2/shim.efi

Using Foreman 2.0.0

Related issues 1 (0 open — 1 closed)

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Lukas Zapletal about 5 years ago

Triaged changed from No to Yes

Thanks, I think we need to change this in the installer because UEFI can work also on non-intel platforms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#Processor_compatibility

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden about 5 years ago

Relevant discussion: https://github.com/theforeman/puppet-foreman_proxy/pull/583.

Do we still need shim.efi at all or can we limit ourselves to shimx64.efi?

Actions

Copy link

Updated by The Foreman Bot about 5 years ago

Status changed from New to Ready For Testing
Assignee set to Lukas Zapletal
Pull request https://github.com/theforeman/puppet-foreman_proxy/pull/592 added

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Carlos Silva about 5 years ago

Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden wrote:

Relevant discussion: https://github.com/theforeman/puppet-foreman_proxy/pull/583.

Do we still need shim.efi at all or can we limit ourselves to shimx64.efi?

I don't know much about the intrinsics of this but in case of a managed DHCP server, this should be handled too. Think i've read somewhere in the generation of the configuration for pxe support that it points to shim.efi instead of shimx64.efi (not really sure where i read it)

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Lukas Zapletal about 5 years ago

I think is a similar but a different issue. So I commented in the thread you refer to:

Ewoud, I believe https://projects.theforeman.org/issues/29690 is a different issue. Problem for the other bug is that Foreman sets up DHCP record for the client to request "shimx64.efi" which is logical as UEFI for IBM POWER is emerging and chances are that users will be booting "shimppc64.efi" too. Problem is, we have never deployed such file, we simply copy it as "shim.efi". So the upcoming change is to copy the file properly and only create "shim.efi" as a symlink to the "shimx64.efi" for backward compatibility.

Actions

Copy link