ventoy maybe the image does not support x64 uefi
We talk about secure boot, not secure system. It works for me if rename extension to .img - tested on a Lenovo IdeaPad 300. Follow the guide below to quickly find a solution. 5. Ventoy Version 1.0.78 What about latest release Yes. to your account, MB: GA-P110-D3, CPU: Intel Core i5 6400, RAM: 8GB DDR4, GPU: IGFX + NVIDIA GT730, MB: GA-H81M-S2PV, CPU : Intel Core i3 4650, RAM 8GB DDR3 GPU: IGFX, slitaz-rolling-core-5in1.iso It looks cool. SB works using cryptographic checksums and signatures. Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community. 4. ext2fsd arnaud. . I made a VHD of an arch installation and installed the vtoyboot mod and it keeps on giving me the no UEFI error. unsigned kernel still can not be booted. This is definitely what you want. 4. There are many suggestion to use tools which make an ISO bootable with UEFI on a flash disk, however it's not that easy as you can only do that with UEFI-enabled ISO's. By UEFI enabled ISO's I mean that the ISO files contain a BOOT\EFI directory with a EFI bootloader. @steve6375 This file is not signed by Microsoft for 'Secure Boot' - do you still wish to boot from it? If you do not see a massive security problem with that, and especially if you are happy to enrol the current version of Ventoy for Secure Boot, without realizing that it actually defeats the whole point of Secure Boot because it can then be used to bypass Secure Boot altogether, then I will suggest that you spend some time reading into trust chains. Option 2: Only boot .efi file with valid signature. However, after adding firmware packages Ventoy complains Bootfile not found. Format Ext4 in Linux: sudo mkfs -t ext4 /dev/sdb1 If Ventoy was intended to be used from an internal hard disk, I would agree with you, but Ventoy is a USB-based multiboot solution and therefore the user must have physical access to the system, so it is the users responsibility to be careful about what he inserts into that USB port. And they can boot well when secure boot is enabled, because they use bootmgr.efi directly from Windows iso. Personally, I don't have much of an issue with Ventoy using the current approach as a stopgap solution, as long as it is agreed that this is only a stopgap, since it comes with a huge drawback, and that a better solution (validation of that the UEFI bootloaders chain loaded from GRUB pass Secure Boot validation when Secure Boot has been enabled by the user) needs to be implemented in the long run. it doesn't support Bluetooth and doesn't have nvidia's proprietary drivers but it's very easy to install. Try updating it and see if that fixes the issue. Then user will be clearly told that, in this case only distros whose bootloader signed with valid key can be loaded. All the .efi/kernel/drivers are not modified. Does the iso boot from a VM as a virtual DVD? I have used OSFMount to convert the img file of memtest v8 to iso but I have encountered the same issue. /s. Use UltraISO for example and open Minitool.iso 4. There are also third-party tools that can be used to check faulty or fake USB sticks. Adding an efi boot file to the directory does not make an iso uefi-bootable. In WIMBOOT mode (ctrl+w) I get 'Loading files. xx%' and then screen resolution changes and get nice Windows Setup GUI. FreeBSD 13.1-RELEASE Aarch64 fails to boot saying "No bootfile found for UEFI!". ^^ maybe a lenovo / thinkpad / thinkcentre issue ? 3. Again, the major problem I see with this fine discussion is that everybody appears to be tiptoeing around the fact that some users have no clue what Secure Boot is intended for (only that, because it says "Secure" they don't want to turn it off), and, rather than trying to educate them about that, we're trying to find ways to keep them "feeling safe" when the choices they might make would leave their system anything but.
Spanish
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
English
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian