From: crude@sausa.ge   
      
   On 1 Feb 2026 20:11:48 GMT, rbowman wrote:   
      
   > On 01 Feb 2026 13:09:48 GMT, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 1 Feb 2026 02:03:09 GMT, rbowman wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 31 Jan 2026 12:53:40 GMT, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> Admittedly, I'm considering putting Mint on this machine once I'm   
   >>>> done playing Fallout London because it supports Secure Boot whereas   
   >>>> Pop_OS!   
   >>>> doesn't. As much as there is to hate about the feature, there are   
   >>>> things to like. I wouldn't mind at least having the impression that   
   >>>> I'm being protected from that kind of malware.   
   >>>   
   >>> I turned Secure Boot off in the BIOS, or I guess the correct term is   
   >>> UEFI now. The old netbook and Dell box have legacy BIOSs.   
   >>   
   >> Is there any reason why you are not bothered by the fact that you   
   >> aren't getting the additional protection of Secure Boot?   
   >   
   > I sometimes ride motorcycles without a helmet. Exactly what is Secure   
   > Boot protecting me against? Counting the Eee PC and the Raspberry Pis 5   
   > out of 7 of my Linux systems don't have Secure Boot. 3 have legacy   
   > BIOSs, and Secure Boot on a Pi is sort of experimental. Screw it up and   
   > nothing will boot.   
      
   Good point. I guess I won't be bothered that a distribution doesn't   
   support Secure Boot then. I have it enabled on the ThinkPad running Mint I   
   use at work, but I have to admit that Secure Boot just makes more tedious   
   if you're running something proprietary.   
      
   --   
   CrudeSausage   
   John 14:6   
   Isaiah 48:16   
   Pop_OS!   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)