Re: accessing efivarfs in debian-installer
On 27/5/2016 10:59, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 10:41:39AM +0200, Francesco De Vita wrote:
> >On 25/5/2016 16:31, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> >> I'm pretty sure we can do that from d-i since that's needed to get
> >> UEFI support working AFAICT. Looking at udebs, it seems you want
> >> to
> >> be loading this one, probably manually if you're at an early
> >> stage:
> >> efi-modules-4.5.0-2-amd64-di_4.5.4-1_amd64.udeb
> >> It contains:
> >> ./lib/modules/4.5.0-2-amd64/kernel/drivers/firmware/efi/efivars.
> >> ko
> >This time I'm using the Stretch Alpha 6 DI. I successfully loaded
> >the efivars module as you suggested, however the efivarfs interface
> >remains inaccessible, it still cannot be mounted.
> >I suppose that the efivarfs module has to be loaded too but there is
> >no trace of efivarfs.ko in the DI and I didn't find any udeb
> >containing it. Should I load it someway from an external source?
> Ah, that's your problem. It looks like we're not including that
> module yet. Most EFI variable users like efibootmgr will fall back
> to the older interfaces, so we've not noticed this yet.
> I'll go and fix that now.
I tested the new Stretch Alpha 7 DI and now it automatically identifies
the wifi card and it asks for the proper driver. After that, the wifi
So far so good but a problem remains. The required firmware is composed
by two files:
The first one is available in a debian package  but the second one,
as I reported here , can be retrieved only by accessing the efivarfs
interface. I repeated the steps discussed in the previous messages (see
the quote above) but still I was unable do it. Is the efivarfs module
still not present in the DI or I missed a step?
Of course the latter file can be retrieved using a live distro on usb,
I simply retrieved it using the Debian that I already installed on the
pc. But starting with nothing, if the efivarfs interface cannot be
accessed, one has to use a live distro and do this additional step, or
take the file from someone else (which in principle should be not
I think that this particular procedure should be easier, right now it
could be a hassle for less experienced people.
If you answer, please add my e-mail address in CC because I'm not
subscribed to this list. Thank you very much.