From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1O5x7l-0002W3-Vg for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 04:23:34 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1O5x7j-0002SV-Vf for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 04:23:32 -0400 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=53273 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O5x7i-0002PT-ML for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 04:23:31 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O5x7h-00070v-G6 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 04:23:30 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:38803) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O5x7g-00070j-V4 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 04:23:29 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 25 Apr 2010 08:23:26 -0000 Received: from 165.126.46.212.adsl.ncore.de (HELO 192.168.2.69) [212.46.126.165] by mail.gmx.net (mp012) with SMTP; 25 Apr 2010 10:23:26 +0200 X-Authenticated: #2145628 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/5h9hHddr5+21wl/3APV4zOeKMzKFPT6/t9D5XzZ BAp0ORYceOPvl/ Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 10:22:45 +0200 From: "Thomas Schmitt" To: grub-devel@gnu.org References: <4BD3416B.7040401@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4BD3416B.7040401@gmail.com> Message-Id: <10647513375284@192.168.2.69> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.58999999999999997 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. Subject: Re: xorriso and EFI boot images X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GNU GRUB List-Id: The development of GNU GRUB List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 08:23:32 -0000 Hi, Vladimir Serbinenko: > I've tested xorriso version : 0.5.5 Version timestamp : > 2010.04.22.221241 and it worked fine. So my Sector Count unit of 512 bytes is ok until other info emerges. (The Fedora wiki gave me doubts.) I am busily refactoring the xorriso level of boot options. This will finally impose another round of regression tests. I'll give you a note when i am done with mine. > > Please take care in grub-mkrescue to express > > your desired sorting by giving -b before > > --efi-boot. > It's already so. So i can join the behavior of mkisofs and genisoimage that the sequence of -b and -eltorito-alt-boot defines the sequence of boot image entries in the boot catalog. --efi-boot FILE will be documented as being virtually enclosed in -eltorito-alt-boot options. I.e. -b ... boot.options \ --efi-boot FILE \ ... will be the same as -b ... boot.options \ -eltorito-alt-boot \ --efi-boot FILE \ -eltorito-alt-boot \ ... No boot option like -boot-info-table will have a chance to be attributed to --efi-boot. > > "The section header has an identification string. > It looks like ISOs I had under the hand with multiple boot images just > zero-fill this field. I have implemented setting of ID String and Selection Criteria in libisofs and in the own command interface of xorriso. So if we ever need it ... :) > > I will have to ponder about implementing > > option -e . > which probably just is "set platform-id to 0xef" I wrote to the author of that wiki article. No answer yet. Googling brought no insight either. Any Fedora users here ? What does mkisofs -help say ? Have a nice day :) Thomas