Hi,
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Let the work continue!
Are there any result ISOs published yet ?
I'd like to include them in my xorriso regression tests.
Have a nice day :)
Thomas
Hi,
On Fri, 26 Aug 2016, adrian15 wrote:
> I don't know how to add Debian Installer to a Debian Live so I have not been
> able to test it.
>
> So your feedback as user of the Debian Installer is welcome.
Your patch seems to work. We get a lot of new top-level entries (install,
expert, rescue,
El 26/08/16 a las 09:52, Raphael Hertzog escribió:
(...)
Can you explain to me why such Installation entries are not available in
binary_syslinux?
Maybe they should be put there also?
Well, the menu entries are there by default:
$ cat share/bootloaders/isolinux/menu.cfg
menu hshift 0
menu
On 26 August 2016 at 13:34, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Aug 2016, adrian15 wrote:
>> > Well, it sucks compared to the default visual appearance of
>> > isolinux/syslinux in live-build.
>> I know, but the purpose of my patch is to add UEFI support. Not to improve
>>
El 26/08/16 a las 13:34, Raphael Hertzog escribió:
On Fri, 26 Aug 2016, adrian15 wrote:
Well, it sucks compared to the default visual appearance of
isolinux/syslinux in live-build.
I know, but the purpose of my patch is to add UEFI support. Not to improve
visual appearance of grub2 so that it
Hi,
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> I believe that syslinux-efi works for less cases than grub-efi
Discussions on syslinux mailing lists indicate that syslinux-efi does
not work with optical drives. (And i know of no bootable ISO 9660
image which would have syslinux-efi in its El Torito boot image
On Fri, 26 Aug 2016, adrian15 wrote:
> > Well, it sucks compared to the default visual appearance of
> > isolinux/syslinux in live-build.
> I know, but the purpose of my patch is to add UEFI support. Not to improve
> visual appearance of grub2 so that it matches the isolinux/syslinux one.
Well,
El 26/08/16 a las 09:52, Raphael Hertzog escribió:
On Thu, 25 Aug 2016, adrian15 wrote:
That's how the grub-pc menu (BIOS) shows currently in live-build.
Well, it sucks compared to the default visual appearance of
isolinux/syslinux in live-build.
I know, but the purpose of my patch is to
On Thu, 25 Aug 2016, adrian15 wrote:
> That's how the grub-pc menu (BIOS) shows currently in live-build.
Well, it sucks compared to the default visual appearance of
isolinux/syslinux in live-build.
> > - there are no menu entries to start debian-installer even though
> >I built my image with
El 25/08/16 a las 15:36, Raphael Hertzog escribió:
Hello Adrian,
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016, adrian15 wrote:
Kristian Klausen thinks is a good idea to wait for your tests.
So your feedback is welcome.
I just built a test Kali image with your patch applied. It works:
I can boot the live system in
El 04/08/16 a las 14:51, Raphael Hertzog escribió:
Hi,
On Sun, 31 Jul 2016, adrian15 wrote:
Is there anyone else than can provide feedback on this patch / branch?
Either by:
* Installing live-build with this applied patch
* Building your iso and check if it boots in both BIOS and UEFI mode.
El 04/08/16 a las 14:51, Raphael Hertzog escribió:
Hi,
On Sun, 31 Jul 2016, adrian15 wrote:
Is there anyone else than can provide feedback on this patch / branch?
Either by:
* Installing live-build with this applied patch
* Building your iso and check if it boots in both BIOS and UEFI mode.
Hi,
On Sun, 31 Jul 2016, adrian15 wrote:
> Is there anyone else than can provide feedback on this patch / branch?
>
> Either by:
>
> * Installing live-build with this applied patch
> * Building your iso and check if it boots in both BIOS and UEFI mode.
> * Check non usual UEFI machines.
>
> I
1) I'm glad Michal finally agrees with the overall implementation of
multi bootloaders support.
2)
I have squashed some commits were it made sense.
I have fixed some commits descriptions.
I have removed a whitespace.
Here's the new rebased branch:
This new update tries to implement actual support for multiple
bootloaders. It only enforces grub-legacy not to be an extra bootloader
because it's current implementation in binary-iso is not compatible
(without hacking) with multiple bootloaders.
* Branch were I added these last improvement
Hello,
On 31 July 2016 at 09:35, adrian15 wrote:
> This new update tries to implement actual support for multiple bootloaders.
> It only enforces grub-legacy not to be an extra bootloader because it's
> current implementation in binary-iso is not compatible (without
On 21 March 2016 at 23:06, adrian15 wrote:
> El 21/03/16 a las 22:19, Michal Suchanek escribió:
>
>> The bootloader support in live-build is limited. With your patches it
>> becomes wrong. eg. compatibility of bootloader with selected
>> filesystem and image type is only
El 21/03/16 a las 22:19, Michal Suchanek escribió:
Hello,
On 21 March 2016 at 21:09, adrian15 wrote:
The branch which include specifically the commits I attach here as patches
is:
https://github.com/rescatux/live-build/tree/efi_support_based_on_debian_cd_rebased_5
.
Hello,
On 21 March 2016 at 21:09, adrian15 wrote:
>
> The branch which include specifically the commits I attach here as patches
> is:
>
> https://github.com/rescatux/live-build/tree/efi_support_based_on_debian_cd_rebased_5
>
> .
>
> About the variable names issue: I
This is my updated set of patches.
Changes since last set of patches:
* Renamed primary and secondary to first and extra terms.
* Forced insmod all_video command in grub.cfg to avoid problems in UEFI
mode.
* Minor changes
Rescatux 0.40b6 which I will release soon will feature this branch
On 26 January 2016 at 23:20, adrian15 wrote:
> El 26/01/16 a las 10:18, Michal Suchanek escribió:
>>
>>>
>>> My use case is the following one. The final user requests:
>>>
>>> --bootloaders=grub-efi,syslinux
>>>
>>> so I show him:
>>>
>>> "Warning. You are using: syslinux
On 25 January 2016 at 21:33, adrian15 wrote:
>
>
> El 25/01/16 a las 16:12, Michal Suchanek escribió:
>>
>> On 25 January 2016 at 03:05, adrian15 wrote:
>>>
>>> El 24/01/16 a las 16:51, Michal Suchanek escribió:
>>
>>
>>> What you are describing here
El 26/01/16 a las 10:18, Michal Suchanek escribió:
If you set bootloaders like
LB_BOOTLOADERS="syslinux grub-efi"
then you can just do
for bootloader in $LB_BOOTLOADERS ; do some $bootloader foo
Mostly what current path does but with commas instead.
IIRC multivalue options use mostly
On 25 January 2016 at 03:05, adrian15 wrote:
> El 24/01/16 a las 16:51, Michal Suchanek escribió:
> What you are describing here is what it's actually implemented in my patch
> (Well, actually the first patch version because the current one enforces
> bootloader roles).
El 25/01/16 a las 16:12, Michal Suchanek escribió:
On 25 January 2016 at 03:05, adrian15 wrote:
El 24/01/16 a las 16:51, Michal Suchanek escribió:
What you are describing here is what it's actually implemented in my patch
(Well, actually the first patch version
El 24/01/16 a las 16:51, Michal Suchanek escribió:
The model does not imply any ranking. "First", "Second", "Third"
could be justified, because there are lists in El Torito and
partition tables where the boot entries have to line up in sequence.
For my taste, "Main" or "Primary" too much
On 24 January 2016 at 00:41, adrian15 wrote:
> El 23/01/16 a las 09:21, Thomas Schmitt escribió:
>>
>> There is a fourth dimension to be expressed: Bootloader.
>> Then there is the dimension of ISO filesystem objects.
>> A user wish would contain at least
>>ISO-Object,
Hi,
adrian15 wrote:
> I propose you to send these concerns to live-wrapper project which has just
> begun and it's advertised as highly modular by Iain.
New customers ? Welcome !
> I think we should focus on making UEFI to boot and not re-thinking all the
> bootloader handling.
I well
Hi,
adrian15 wrote:
> It seems you are proposing to add like three tags: Medium?, Firmware?,
> Architecture? but I don't get how that would transform into options that the
> final user can use.
For now i only state that this is a model by which one
can describe the purpose of boot loaders in an
Hi,
after checking El Torito specs, i have to correct my statements
about ranking of El Torito boot images.
The first entry in the boot catalog not only has the title
"Initial" but "Initial/Default".
"4.4 Boot Entry Selection
If the CD has several boot entries, a default entry which boots a
El 23/01/16 a las 09:21, Thomas Schmitt escribió:
There is a fourth dimension to be expressed: Bootloader.
Then there is the dimension of ISO filesystem objects.
A user wish would contain at least
ISO-Object, Bootloader, Medium, Firmware, Architecture
E.g.
Appended Partition, with GRUB2
El 21/01/16 a las 10:13, Thomas Schmitt escribió:
Hi,
For the nomenclature: "USB" alone is misleading because there are
also optical drives attachable to USB. Better distinguish the boot
media families CDROM (CD, DVD, BD) and HDD (hard disk, USB stick,
memory card, ...).
Sorry. I was refering
El 21/01/16 a las 12:57, Thomas Schmitt escribió:
adrian15 wrote:
Do you mean if you have:
xorriso bunch-of-options-1 -eltorito-alt-boot bunch-of-options-2
you could just re-arrange them as:
xorriso bunch-of-options-2 -eltorito-alt-boot bunch-of-options-1
and it would be fine?
From the
El 21/01/16 a las 10:13, Thomas Schmitt escribió:
Now primary means: "First lure" and secondary means "Second lure" by your
definition.
There are normally two lures per firmware-hardware combination.
Depending on the medium, the lures are recognized in El Torito,
or in MBR, or in partition
Despite of being discussing how to implement all of these properly. I
feel it's right to show you my current work so that you can comment on it.
I attach my updated patches.
1) The main differences from my original patches are:
* I use more additional bootloader functions
* The code ensures
Hi,
i wrote:
> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~libburnia-team/libisofs/scdbackup/view/head:/doc/boot_sectors.txt
adrian15 wrote:
> I want to document the different ways of how BIOS boot, UEFI boot and
> Secure Boot work and that might be helpful.
Secure Boot is not covered. (I am not sure whether
El 18/01/16 a las 14:00, Thomas Schmitt escribió:
So any bootloader is made primary by leaving out -eltorito-alt-boot.
There is no "primary" or "secondary" on the level of boot images
and loaders. (Of course you may call them this way in your project.)
There are first, second, third ... El
El 18/01/16 a las 13:38, Thomas Schmitt escribió:
Hi,
adrian15 wrote:
* What is it a secondary bootloader?
It's what happens when you request mkisofs that your bootloader to be
boot in second place or as a second partition. I don't know how it
actually works.
An ISO may contain several lures
Hi,
Michal Suchanek wrote:
> -eltorito-alt-boot is not documented option of xorriso.
You need to look into man xorrisofs for the options of the -as mkisofs
emulation.
-eltorito-alt-boot
Finalize the current El Torito boot catalog entry and begin a
new one. A boot image file
A quick update on my grub-efi work:
1) I have noticed I have missed to give execution permissions to many
files when I rebased.
These are:
scripts/build/binary_grub-efi
scripts/build/binary_syslinux-efi
scripts/build/efi-image
scripts/build/grub-cpmodules
You can find additional commits to
El 18/01/16 a las 07:31, Michal Suchanek escribió:
Hello,
thanks for working on this.
On 18 January 2016 at 05:24, adrian15 wrote:
In my last message I forgot to CC many people who are involved in this bug
so I'm going to refer to my former message, CC some people and
On 18 January 2016 at 10:43, adrian15 wrote:
> El 18/01/16 a las 07:31, Michal Suchanek escribió:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> thanks for working on this.
>>
>
>> As to the primary and secondary bootloader - how is the efi bootloader
>> secondary? It boots the same as the legacy
Hi,
adrian15 wrote:
> * What is it a secondary bootloader?
> It's what happens when you request mkisofs that your bootloader to be
> boot in second place or as a second partition. I don't know how it
> actually works.
An ISO may contain several lures for boot firmware.
If it is booted from
Hello,
thanks for working on this.
On 18 January 2016 at 05:24, adrian15 wrote:
> In my last message I forgot to CC many people who are involved in this bug
> so I'm going to refer to my former message, CC some people and finally point
> you to my repo/branches where you
In my last message I forgot to CC many people who are involved in this
bug so I'm going to refer to my former message, CC some people and
finally point you to my repo/branches where you might find interesting
commits.
1) My original message with attached patches (which you can download to
45 matches
Mail list logo