fedora-qa / blocker-review

#2075 [shim] `shim-ia32` missing since `shim-15.8-4` | rhbz#2391723
Opened by blockerbot. Modified

Open
Close Issue

Bug details: ** https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2391723 **
Information from BlockerBugs App:
2391723

Current vote summary

Commented but haven't voted yet: supakeen

The votes have been last counted at 2026-03-11 15:15 UTC and the last processed comment was #comment-1008047

To learn how to vote, see:
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review
A quick example: BetaBlocker +1 (where the tracker name is one of BetaBlocker/FinalBlocker/BetaFE/FinalFE/0Day/PreviousRelease and the vote is one of +1/0/-1)

First, do we have a criterion to boot the ISO on 32-bit efi on 64-bit systems or is it best effort? I couldn't find one from a quick scan around the criteria and the one that came closest was:

Release-blocking images must boot from all system firmware types that are commonly found on the primary architectures.

The image-builder produced ISO (currently: only Fedora IoT) that are part of the Fedora compose are have never included shim-ia32 previously.

From a cursory review this was reverted and fixed up in kiwi. It would still need to be reverted in lorax and potentially implemented in image-builder (there's a re-opened PR to introduce this functionality which will likely make it into next weeks release, so before the final freeze)?

I am a weak -1 FinalBlocker, +1 FinalFE; I don't think the setup is that common and many of the artifacts work.

The ones that wouldn't work (that I'm aware of) are the everything/server network installer/dvd installer (produced by lorax) and the Fedora IoT ISO (produced by image-builder).
Edited by supakeen
Metadata
None
None
None
None
None
Static archive. pagure.io was sunset in 2026; this is a read-only snapshot.
Red Hat Logo

Fedora is sponsored by Red Hat. Learn more about the relationship between Red Hat and Fedora »

© Red Hat, Inc. and others.