TinyCore UEFI only Intel NUC on Windows

[baumkuchen84]

Hello my friends,

it's probably been asked a thousand times but I'm having hard times getting this to run..
Intel deactivated Legacy Mode = Bios = CRM on the NUC UEFI and I cant get the iso to boot on the Intel NUC

I'm a linux noob and from what it seems every linux distribution is like you download the right iso, clean the usb
drive and for example run etcher and patch the iso onto it.
Now this however works with Kubuntu which I just tested and some other Linux distributions but not with
tiny core. The nuc tells me there's no boot device.
It seems I'm missing the right partition after flashing the usb which seems to be some kind of efi partiton.

Now all guides I found to get this done are involving heavy linux partioning the usb while you're already using
linux on the pc you use to setup the tiny core usb drive.

Is there any means to get this done from windows? I could install software allowing to write to the linux partition
of the flashed usb and change what must be changed...

thanks very much in advance
drive

[curaga]

No, not from Windows. It might work using a Linux VM and passing the usb inside it, but I'd recommend a Linux live cd instead, more reliable.
edit: Or of course, if you can boot Kubuntu from usb, then plug in a second usb for TC and edit from Kubuntu.

[baumkuchen84]

Alright thanks using a live system is a good idea... didn't think of that xD

[PDP-8]

Intel deactivated Legacy Mode = Bios = CRM on the NUC UEFI and I cant get the iso to boot on the Intel NUC

I have very good news for you.  But first, what model NUC are you running? - I'm running the NUC6AYH.  The "Visual Bios" is a thing of beauty.

For me, holding down F2 while it boots gets you into it.  There, you can enable "legacy boot" to exist along with uefi, or in fact make it an old school "Legacy only" box.  Very flexible.

I'd be very surprised that you can't do the same, unless perhaps some prior owner locked you out?

I'm a linux noob and from what it seems every linux distribution is like you download the right iso, clean the usb
drive and for example run etcher and patch the iso onto it.
Now this however works with Kubuntu which I just tested and some other Linux distributions but not with
tiny core. The nuc tells me there's no boot device.

That's right.  Although us gray-beards do a DD.  As it stands, the current TinyCorePure64 iso is not even recognized as a boot device for uefi-ONLY boxes.

It is NOT a 3rd party burner issue.  There is something in the 64-bit iso that makes it different than most when it comes to uefi-only.   Even though it may be following technical standards, the real-world hardware disagrees.  I'm researching that myself.

So the first solution is to get into your Visual Bios and enable Legacy boot options.  Visual Bios makes this so easy and simple to see.  A far cry from the older bios menus that's for sure!

Your second option, is to utilize a chain-boot process.

The VENTOY usb stick maker, usually designed to make booting multiple iso's a breeze, can obviously be used with only a single one if you want.  There is a Windows version, and Linux version (which is a script).  GPL.

Ventoy solves TWO problems:  It will be recognized by uefi-only hardware as a valid boot device.  And, if your box is locked into Secure-Boot and you can't change that, you can register the VENTOY keys with Secure Boot and proceed.

All that you need on the VENtoy boot stick, is the TinyCorePure64 iso, which it will chain load and you operate on TC grub menus (if you want) like usual when it gets to that point.

Ventoy and other multibooters are discussed in other threads.

It seems I'm missing the right partition after flashing the usb which seems to be some kind of efi partiton.

VENtoy takes care of that.  I still can't figure out why the release iso doesn't boot on uefi-only.  Maybe testing on an actual uefi-only machine would help.  But there may be a technical or other forward-looking reason as to why it won't.

Nevertheless, with TinyCore being a toolkit rather than a "distro", there are many ways to accomplish things.

So hope this helps.  The easiest thing to do is figure out why you cannot enable legacy mode in Visual Bios.  Out of the box, you should be able to do so.  If someone has tweaked the bios prior to you, well, that's a variable I can't touch from this distance.

VENtoy can be used to overcome this obstacle if it comes to that.

Just know that TinyCore does not agree with everyone.  If you are looking for a hands-off experience, well you may become frustrated.  If you are the type who likes to turn wrenches, which means more than just following a checklist, then TC might be for you.

[PDP-8]

Just to reiterate - Intel NUC's are not locked down.  You can operate uefi-only, csm/legacy, or legacy only.  Easily.  Your choice.

Let me know your model number, and I'll try to help you out.  Let me know if pressing F2 does not get you into Visual Bios.

My NUC is only one of a handful of machines that can be placed into uefi-only mode, or are simple modern uefi-only machines.  NONE of them recognize the 64 bit iso as a valid boot device - so the problem is not that it can't boot, it's not even recognized!

Don't take this as disparaging remarks about the great work that the TC devs do.  Sometimes it might be as simple as a missing comma or some other reason.  And the fact that TC doesn't have Ubuntu-like funding or staffing!

[Sashank999]

Just speaking up, I am one of the most haters of UEFI. WTH ? 

for BIOS it was enough to have 640 kilobytes of RAM. With TianoCore the minimum is somewhere around 64 megabytes.
the higher abstraction layer and the ability to run UEFI applications opens the door to rootkits, which were already spotted in the wild.
with more complexity comes slower boot ups. A BIOS machine can boot a Linux kernel by the time video is initialized and TianoCore logo is shown under UEFI. .
many argue that UEFI introduces an unnecessary complexity that won't be used by the operating systems anyway, one of the most prominent speakers being Linus Torvalds. It is a fact that not many mainline OSes take advantage of the CPU-independent drivers nor the flexible and modular design, and every OS needs a native driver.

Support for GPT in Linux is enabled by turning on the option CONFIG_EFI_PARTITION (EFI GUID Partition Support) during kernel configuration. This option allows Linux to recognize and use GPT disks after the system firmware passes control over the system to Linux.

Secure boot is supported by Windows 8 and 8.1, Windows Server 2012, and 2012 R2, and Windows 10, VMware vSphere 6.5 and a number of Linux distributions including Fedora (since version 18), openSUSE (since version 12.3), RHEL (since version 7), CentOS (since version 7), Debian (since version 10), and Ubuntu (since version 12.04.2). As of January 2017, FreeBSD support is in a planning stage.

Which means we would need to recompile the kernels and increase their size for some newer gen PCs. But that means more burden for older PCs.

One thing I am really shocked  is that the Microsoft, a commercial tech giant which is famous for its Windows - a closed-source software, is running the world's largest open-source platform - GitHub.
Grabbed from here : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface

[PDP-8]

Unfortunately, uefi and secure-boot are commonly blamed for a variety of ills that do not exist and are a favorite of conspiracy theorists needing to fill their blogs.

Let's separate them from each other:

1) Secure-boot can easily be disabled by the consumer.  And guess what - when you reboot, windows will still run.  The only thing that can stop you here is if someone has password protected or locked the end-user out of changing this option manually.

2) Aside and different from secure-boot, is uefi.  Uefi works fine.  Conspiracy theorists don't like change.  Doesn't matter - simply put, it gets harder and harder to find modern legacy boxes.

The problem is not uefi, but a project may fade away by not keeping up - or only support a dwindling demographic of vintage computer enthusiasts.  You may end up like NetBSD still being able to boot a DEC MicroVax.  For 3 people actually interested just for old-times sake.

But, the real-world being what it is, there may be instances where the published specs are not followed to the letter, and "de-facto" standards emerge where silly things like capitilazation and location of directory names matter - when the specs say they shouldn't.

Things like this will be found out if the iso itself is physically tested on real-world machines, and adjustments made.

As it stands, the iso is not self-supporting - bootstrappable - on modern uefi-only machines.  It takes another system to do so.

I'm familiar with that concept.  To get Unix Ver 0.1 running, all you do is go to your GE 635, cross-compile and build the filesystem there, and then transfer back to your PDP-7.

Quaint.  You can learn a lot.  But at some point, the GE 635 gets thrown away, while your PDP, if not able to bootstrap itself, puts your project into the dustbin of history.

[Sashank999]

Did anyone see this ? https://habr.com/ru/post/446238/

My question is : Is this legal ? Can we use this on TCL ?

[PDP-8]

We should probably move this to OT land threads..

For 99.999% of the TC user-base, this is a non-issue since they have physical access to the machine to disable secure boot easily.

Let's bring it back to the op's original problem:

1) Op is running a modern machine, and expects that a 64-bit iso will boot using normal procedures (be it dd, or other burners) like the rest of the linux community does.

2) Not knowing that the iso will not be recognized as a valid boot device by a modern 64-bit uefi-only machine, blames uefi and/or secure boot instead, which is not the problem.

Ok, so it's admirable to get the parts individually, kernel and so forth, partition, format, install the bootloader to the stick piece by piece.  Juanito showed how easily that is done.

It's the way we did it for years when it came to doing this all manually to a hard disk drive before any cd's or iso's appeared.

The situation would be sort of analogous to going back 15 years or more, and trying to burn a release iso as an end-user that simply won't boot no matter what tool you use.  You burn through a spindle of CD's thinking it's your hardware.  Or brand of CD.  Maybe it's the speed?  People blame Roxio (or whatever burner was popular at the time).

What confuses the matter is that it DOES work for people using older non-scsi burners, but nobody realizes that.

Thus, the issue never gets resolved and we all sink into the quagmire of blaming uefi standards and secure boot.

That's fine for the vintage-computer-club.

I don't know - maybe it *ME* that's the weird one, that truly enjoys how TinyCore (and relatives) run on truly modern machinery.  Heh, what would be considered "low end" today, is rock-star hardware with the *cores.

For the average joe wanting to do the same, if the iso won't boot, then sayonara.

[PDP-8]

[SOLVED]

We can mark this as solved.  Details here:

http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php/topic,24104.0.html

@baumkuchen84
For this particular piece of hardware, you need to be able to get into Visual Bios.

Go into the Secure-Boot tab and make sure that is disabled.  Standard procedure, and easy to do.

Under the BOOT tab, got into "ADVANCED".  There you will see an option to boot "optical media"  Enable it.

There is no need to enable legacy/csm options.

That's it.  There is a chance that my descriptions will not *exactly* match the wording in the system you have, but the gist of it will be apparent.

As an aside, should you wish to update your Visual Bios to the very latest, it is easy to do so here:

https://downloadcenter.intel.com/product/98414/Intel-NUC

I prefer to Filter by "OS Independent" to help find bios updates easier.

The way I do it, is prefer to copy the .bio file to a decent stick, and use F7 upon bootup to start the process.

For my NUC6ACYH model, it can be found here.  If you do your search right, your model screen may look similar to this:

https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/29319/BIOS-Update-AYAPLCEL-86A-?product=95062

Of course, you can choose other methods described to do the same.  Of course use the file specific to your machine!

Hope this helps.