I am trying to install Leap 42.2 on a Toshiba Satellite i7 laptop that is a few years old. The only way I can get the 42.2 USB key image I created on my main 42.2 desktop to boot is to shut Secure Boot off in the UEFI firmare on this laptop. If it's enabled I get this error message programmed into the firmware: "Boot failure: A proper digital signature was not found. One of the files on the selected boot device was rejected by the secure boot feature." So essentially I am being forced to use Windows if I want secure boot. If I want to use openSUSE, I have to downgrade the entire security of the machine. Is there any way around this? For years I kept reading about how great UEFI is and how it's the future of booting. But I have dealt with 100-fold more problems helping people (and myself) get out of UEFI booby traps, with crappy vendor UEFI firmware that is buggy and not Linux-friendly, vendor lock-in, bad EFI vars stuck in the firmware that prevent the computer from booting at all, and firmware updates or power loss that clear the NVRAM which then completely wipes out the EFI vars and the system is left unbootable. It that last example, the user would have to run a Linux rescue disk and run a series of commands to re-write the variables back into the nvram. What average user knows how to do that? So we have some additional security at the cost of reliability. I never had any of these issues with BIOS-based PC's, and as soon as UEFI computers hit the market the openSUSE forums lit up with 100's-1000's of people writing in about all types of problems that all were all due to UEFI. It seems to me that all UEFI did is create additonal variables with people's computers that could go awry, and it's bloated and overly complicated to just simply boot a computer. It's an OS to boot the OS. Manufacturers appeared to take whatever UEFI standard that was created and bastardize it. There needs to be a consortium that specifically focuses on actually making manufacturers adhere to the exact UEFI standard if they want to use the UEFI name and logo, and make it so users are not locked into using Windows only. It looks to me that UEFI has taken the same direcion as ACPI. Hardware vendors writing the specs of their hardware to interop with Microsoft's non-standard driver programming. The BIOS standard could have been improved and expanded, and instead of doing that, they threw it away and wrote this bloated kludge standard called "UEFI" that manufacturers don't adhere to more often than not. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org