Bug 521528
| Summary: | MacBook Aluminum Install: Local boot option fails with default value | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | W. Michael Petullo <mike> |
| Component: | anaconda | Assignee: | Anaconda Maintenance Team <anaconda-maint-list> |
| Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | low | ||
| Version: | 11 | CC: | anaconda-maint-list, lili, vanmeeuwen+fedora |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | x86_64 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2009-09-08 19:29:34 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
W. Michael Petullo
2009-09-06 18:57:51 UTC
0xffff says to attempt a boot from the next device in the boot order, which we hope is a hard drive. Of course, 0x80 only works when the first disk is the one we want to boot from. What if there are multiple hard drives installed in the system? (In reply to comment #1) > 0xffff says to attempt a boot from the next device in the boot order, which we > hope is a hard drive. Of course, 0x80 only works when the first disk is the > one we want to boot from. What if there are multiple hard drives installed in > the system? I did not know the significance of 0xffff. However, my MacBook would not boot when using this value. So, to answer your question, in the case where there are multiple hard drives the MacBook would not boot, as long as 0xffff were used. I do not have a firm grasp on my MacBook's firmware yet (this may be due to a difference in how the MacBook boots). Can we reopen this bug and consider it a low priority request for enhancement? *** Bug 523589 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** |