This is hilarious. People in this post all used out of date information to spread misinformation, and non of them personally can demonstrate that they themselves are able to install and run Arch in secure boot mode, including yourself. It'll people like this who pass your opinions as facts and try to mislead readers. I personally tested Manjaro in 4 of my computers all with UEFI SEcure boot and Manjaro could not even boot in secure boot mode. It's not because of my hardware because these computers are from 5 to 1 year old with different brands. Do any of you personally try to install Arch on any computer in secure boot mode? I don't care Arch/Mint or whatever distro, but I am surprised there are still people on this forum who can not distinguish opinions from facts. If you claim you can install Arch in secure boot mode, prove it. Show me that it can be done NOW, not two years ago. A simple screen shot is enough. Don't pretend you are an expert and use out of date info as facts. That makes yourself look stupid. I don't hate any distro, I just simply pointed out a fact, and obviously some fanboies are pissed.
First of all, I apologize for wasting your time, @oliverjia ... Yes, the information is outdated, but I believe that I wrote that the article was from 2015. On the other hand, if you really mean it when you say that you don't care which distro you use (or did I get that wrong?), then try Mint, or Ubuntu. I use Mint, on UEFI system, with Secure Boot on. It works flawlessly. Finally, you, sir, need to work on your manners. What you need to do is to apologize to @GOD666 for calling her stupid. No need for that, unless you aim to get banned...
He/she wrongfully accused me for spreading misinformation, while he/she is actually the one who is doing that. What kind of person would do such a thing? Now you/she/he try to play innocent? You call this "manners"? Come on, please don't insult my intelligence. Also, I don't see your point bringing up the fact that mint/Ubuntu are working on UEFI secure boot. Of course they work, because 4 out of 5 of my computers are running Ubuntu for years, and I clearly mentioned that in my previous post today. All this fuss about secure boot is towards Arch. Again, please read before post. I would apologize to GOD666 if he/she can show me that he/she installed Arch with secure boot on NOW, not two years ago by someone else. Otherwise she should apologize to me for saying I try to pass opinion as fact, while he/she is the one who's doing this.
Be that as it may, you still owe her an apology. Now, I get that we're all human and we all have bad days sometimes (in fact, today I've had a really bad day, too), but that does not give anyone the right to insult other people here. So, I'm not playing innocent, I apologized for not carefully reading the articles I've linked and for "wasting your time". I can understand that people often disagree, but we can do it sans insulting name calling...
Why would you need to enable the CSM (Compatibility Support Module) "because there is no signed boot loader in Arch"? CSM is used to support operating systems that require BIOS/Legacy/mbr (or whatever you want to call it) on UEFI systems. I don't see what this has to do with Secure Boot mode in UEFI. I've used UEFI without CSM on several systems but have never used Secure Boot. One of the good things about UEFI is you don't even need a boot loader. You can add an entry into the UEFI table for your kernel and it will boot directly without Grub or any other boot loader. Why do you need Secure Boot anyway?
You are right about the CSM mode in UEFI. It's just an option in the UEFI to make it backward compatible with the old BIOS legacy mode. Secure boot will prevent unsigned or modified boot loader from booting, so theoretically it adds one more layer of security - to prevent malware from modifying the normal boot loader. So it will effectively remove the notorious BIOS virus. Try to boot Arch/Manjaro boot media on your computer with secure boot on. Most likely you can not boot it so you can not install it. If you manually add kernel entry into your UEFI table, wouldn't you need to get into UEFI table and select which item to boot from every time you boot your computer? Normally there will be multiple boot options in the UEFI menu. I always use a boot loader for each OS anyway.
Apologize to him/her for what? I said before and I will say again - if he/she can prove that he/she can install Arch/Manjaro in secure boot mode and can use the OS normally after each upgrade/update, then I'll apologize to him/her since I would be wrong in that case. Until then, he/she remains the one who does not have manner and who needs to apologize to me.
once we had Ubuntu as primary system boot because of it launched the menu to choose from. was a dual boot, Ubuntu and Windows. I damage boot by force much the off but was back all in Ubuntu hence extracted all information safe.
I don't know what the heck you are talking about. No one wants you to prove a "double negative" (whatever that means). I simply requested you prove a single positive, a "fact" that you claimed. Upload a single, simple video, to demonstrate the whole process that you successfully installed Arch Linux with secure boot turned on, starting from booting up your Arch cd/usb, ending with a working desktop. You claim that something can be done, then you bear the burden of proving it. That's the basic principle of US-UK legal system. Simple as that. You rely on some random IDs on the Internet to prove your point, while the WIKI article clearly said the info in there is out of date? You choose to believe in random internet IDs rather than the official Arch WIKI? Come on now. Who's the troll?
You have not proven that it cannot, while I have proved with documentation, along with 3 other people that it can. The burden of proof lies on you. Your redirect is only further proof of your misinformation.
You took what I said out of context in order to add more redirect in order to promote your misinformation. The full context I said, was: The problem was Windows XP, not Linux since Windows XP 32-bit does not support it as the OS is primarily older. I dual-boot between systems. https://forums.mydigitallife.net/threads/xp-installation.75391/ Again, you continue to take what I said out of context in order to promote your agenda, since I also was quoted as saying: This is what I used and it did work. -- You are ignoring that fact, as you are ignoring all facts. You are however right, I did not read the full article as I am now wasting time on this and, to be honest, on you. You have 3 people on here telling you it works (myself, included). 3 normal people. Another fact that you wish to conveniently ignore, along with all the documentation (both automatic and manual). As for me wiping out my whole established computer, which I have perfectly configured just the way I want it, just to prove some obvious troll wrong on the internet, who would likely later deny the results since doing so would prove nothing, anyways. -- Sure, I'll get right on that! /sarcasm Spoiler: Someone is wrong on The Internet Congratulations are in order since this seems to apply to you.
I wasted enough time on a "normal person" who bear his/her head in the sand and keep repeating the same thing. "But I do remember using "Arch Anywhere" which is a script that automatically installs Arch Linux for you (saving you time) and it worked in a secure boot." You remember? "Arch Anywhere" is just some scripts that will allow you to install Arch in a GUI type of way to help you install Arch. It has nothing to do with the tedious steps you just linked about manually managing EFI secure boot on Arch. If you don't believe my word, check with the author of Arch Anywhere. They'll tell you the same thing. All it does it to add a layer of GUI on top of Arch official installer. It will not alter the installation routine. Do you seriously believe it can automatically "Knowing Secure Boot Key Types, Creating Secure Boot Keys, Signing EFI Binaries and Replacing Keys Using KeyTool" automatically for you? You seem to love to treat your opinion/imagination as facts. I tell you to get your "facts" right. Don't day dream.
Thank you for making my point. I know exactly how "Arch Anywhere" works, I wrote up the post here https://forums.mydigitallife.net/threads/arch-anywhere-2-2-9-released.75114/ and clearly said exactly what it was. To quote my own self: Yet regardless, of how I installed Arch Linux, it does, in fact, work in a secure boot. -- That was the point. You are in fact the one using your opinion and dislike for Arch Linux in order to promote your opinions as fact. Just as you continue to take every comment out of context to further your agenda, which you have now proven (again). Spoiler This is putting aside that you also continue to ignore any factual documentation or sources. I think I no longer need to further reply. You have shown your true colors and they are here for everyone to see.
What you know is how to use it to install Arch on a non-secure boot environment. You are not the author, and in a few days I'll prove you are lying. Wait for it.
I never said I was the author of "Arch Anywhere". Nor have I implied it. -- I simply stated that I wrote up that post here on MDL. It is a modified post from the original author and my only "bit" added was my quoted text. "To be clear, Arch-Anywhere is NOT a Linux Distro, rather it is a set of automated scripts which are designed to help you install Arch Linux from an easier start." https://forums.mydigitallife.net/threads/arch-anywhere-2-2-9-released.75114/ I only use it and sometimes promote it (since it is helpful). Nor am I claiming anything other than the fact that it makes installing Arch Linux easier to install. I have not manually installed Arch Linux in quite some time. 3 folks have come forward, myself included, and we have all happily used Arch Linux in a secure boot. You have also been given more than enough documentation on how to do so. -- You've yet to provide anything other than your dislike (opinion) for Arch Linux. You mad bro?