From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-user+bounces-160798-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EC591389E2
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 16:56:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 071E6E0B81;
	Sat, 20 Dec 2014 16:56:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-lb0-f173.google.com (mail-lb0-f173.google.com [209.85.217.173])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 898C6E0AAC
	for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 16:56:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-lb0-f173.google.com with SMTP id z12so2184177lbi.4
        for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 08:56:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=u5r/vPxKDW3qGG7SmQZd3ats1cRXrNrZCr5c/4juaVU=;
        b=XMAsB8CK7buVgHELGWuzKKQaCM5Dx857svxMTwwYzbE+J1oKjA9cnggSdcbPu602NO
         bdr/NOcrw/p8CDpUmm4wrB+rs+e08yjvdBPuyQEEL2pxZkY8P0e3q7pjqFJP2VyfKBgx
         0dMzzJZvU+M6sazRXXNKc9mJTLLkGz14Q9u3vg3PHB5iyaa0ytzhiRL3eCDlOio45XcV
         J1Hpokt2LO9yPbn6yluK3WwHoYgdq216TWFUGVsrsACK2DZaYaQnnb/IlW2tltFOfrJM
         tzpSmBqfCQ3l7mwnKhsoxjaoVUz8FaaskMeYXESuOjq7P3Si2YuFhXTamyU7FlRSidJE
         014Q==
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.202.71 with SMTP id kg7mr13209872lbc.16.1419094588112;
 Sat, 20 Dec 2014 08:56:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.152.47.240 with HTTP; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 08:56:28 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <201412191612.59480.michaelkintzios@gmail.com>
References: <201412191522.14063.michaelkintzios@gmail.com>
	<20141219154643.GD4925@ns1.bonedaddy.net>
	<201412191612.59480.michaelkintzios@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 11:56:28 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOdo=SxQH5KbjTdggef4hiHNegpBBGib7M93pGF1H9MYXyj8Hw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] New PC, new boot concepts
From: Tom H <tomh0665@gmail.com>
To: Gentoo User <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Archives-Salt: 486a3d80-6cbb-423e-8186-9e063bc7ce79
X-Archives-Hash: 048ba5a6e00bb43e61be1d5d21eb09d1

On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Mick <michaelkintzios@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday 19 Dec 2014 15:46:43 Todd Goodman wrote:
>> * Mick <michaelkintzios@gmail.com> [141219 10:22]:
>>
>>> I am trying to find out what is considered good practice as far as
>>> UEFI/MBR and boot management goes.
>>
>> FWIW, I've built recent machines with UEFI/GPT but I mostly build recent
>> machines using BIOS-mode/GPT or MBR.  It usually depends on how well the
>> mobo I'm using works with either.
>>
>> Some of the mobos I've used have some seriously crummy UEFI
>> implementations that look like they installed Windows and that worked so
>> didn't bother testing any further.
>>
>> I don't dual-boot windows so BIOS/GPT works OK (I believe windows still
>> assumes UEFI == GPT and BIOS == MBR but I don't know.)
>
> Are you saying that there is no benefit in moving to UEFI for Linux usage, if
> the MoBo can boot in conventional BIOS mode?

The advantage of efi over bios is that the boot loader doesn't have to
embed anything in the mbr, the post mbr gap, or the bios boot
partition.