I'm getting there. I can install in uefi as the first install, as a subsequent install, encrypted install, as a non-uefi install (works if it's not the first linux), add, remove or rename bootloaders, boot from grub command line, and other goodies, but I'm still not convinced that this is the way to go.
It's actually pretty easy to do. The problem is trying to account for all possible configurations and all possible screw-ups.
Problems/Issues
Buggy and non-standard uefi implementations on hardware make it impossible to predict what a user will face, and there's a real potential for major disaster and a high potential for confusion. (Three weeks of this, and I'm still confused.)
Conflicting grub packages - grub-pc or grub-efi? Which one should be installed in the refracta iso? (It is possible to install to bios hardware when grub-efi is installed, but you have to keep a copy of /usr/lib/grub/i386-pc/<modules> someplace where the package manager won't find it, but also where you can tell chrooted grub in the new installation where to find it to do grub-install.) It's either that or include the necessary packages in the iso, so the user can install whichever ones they need, or use a network connection to install them. And I don't like any of those solutions.
Why do we need this again? Just for people who dual-boot with windows 8+? Or are there motherboards that do uefi only? (if so, they should be renamed mofoboards.)
Note: I think uefi support is needed for creating a snapshot and for a live-usb, so that you can boot live media on computers that use uefi. That way, you don't have to go mucking around in someone else's setup to change the boot method. We already have that in the latest refractasnapshot (beta) and refracta2usb-2.3.0.
Thoughts? Suggestions? Warnings?