From: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
To: Kory Maincent <kory.maincent@bootlin.com>
Cc: thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com, buildroot@buildroot.org
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 4/7] fs/iso9660: add support for hybrid image using Grub bootloader on BIOS and EFI
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2021 23:05:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210927210514.GF1504958@scaer> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210923155726.87851-5-kory.maincent@bootlin.com>
Köry, All,
On 2021-09-23 17:57 +0200, Kory Maincent spake thusly:
> Add support for building an hybrid ISO9660 image compatible with legacy
> and UEFI BIOS.
> The option -eltorito-alt-boot need to be used in the xorriso command
> to generate the hybrid image.
So I was wondering why you had to rename the variables, and why you
split the values with -eltorito-alt-boot right in between...
As I understand it from the xorriso command line, -eltorito-alt-boot
basically means "OK, we're done with the previous boot parameters, now
we start a new set of boot parameters", so the order of options *is*
important.
Right?
Furthermore, -eltorito-alt-boot and -no-emul-boot are not conflicting,
because the former is really this separator as discussed above, while
the latter specifies the type of the current boot image.
Right?
(For my information: how many such alternate boot parameters can we
define: is it limited to just two, or can we add more?)
> Signed-off-by: Kory Maincent <kory.maincent@bootlin.com>
> ---
[--SNIP--]
> diff --git a/fs/iso9660/iso9660.mk b/fs/iso9660/iso9660.mk
> index 921efa1b02..9c2535d102 100644
> --- a/fs/iso9660/iso9660.mk
> +++ b/fs/iso9660/iso9660.mk
[--SNIP--]
> @@ -151,24 +156,32 @@ endif # ROOTFS_ISO9660_USE_INITRD
>
> ROOTFS_ISO9660_OPTS += \
> -J \
> - -R \
> - -no-emul-boot
> + -R
>
> -ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_BIOS_BOOTLOADER),y)
> -ROOTFS_ISO9660_OPTS += \
> +ROOTFS_ISO9660_BOOTLOADER_OPTS_BIOS = \
ROOTFS_ISO9660_OPTS_BIOS
> + -b $(ROOTFS_ISO9660_BOOT_IMAGE) \
> + -no-emul-boot \
> -boot-load-size 4 \
> - -boot-info-table \
> - -b $(ROOTFS_ISO9660_BOOT_IMAGE)
> -endif
> + -boot-info-table
You are also reordering the remaining options. Is that really necessary?
Or is it for symmetry with the EFI case where the "image" option comes
first?
> -ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_EFI_BOOTLOADER),y)
> -ROOTFS_ISO9660_OPTS += \
> - --efi-boot $(ROOTFS_ISO9660_EFI_PARTITION)
> +ROOTFS_ISO9660_BOOTLOADER_OPTS_EFI = \
ROOTFS_ISO9660_OPTS_EFI
> + --efi-boot $(ROOTFS_ISO9660_EFI_PARTITION) \
> + -no-emul-boot
> +
> +ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_BIOS_BOOTLOADER)$(BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_EFI_BOOTLOADER),yy)
> +ROOTFS_ISO9660_BOOTLOADER_OPTS = $(ROOTFS_ISO9660_BOOTLOADER_OPTS_BIOS)
> +ROOTFS_ISO9660_BOOTLOADER_OPTS += -eltorito-alt-boot
> +ROOTFS_ISO9660_BOOTLOADER_OPTS += $(ROOTFS_ISO9660_BOOTLOADER_OPTS_EFI)
Hmmm This is pretty ugly... What about:
ROOTFS_ISO9660_OPTS += \
$(ROOTFS_ISO9660_OPTS_BIOS) \
-eltorito-alt-boot \
$(ROOTFS_ISO9660_OPTS_EFI)
Also, does BIOS really has to come before EFI? If so, why?
> +else ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_BIOS_BOOTLOADER),y)
> +ROOTFS_ISO9660_BOOTLOADER_OPTS = $(ROOTFS_ISO9660_BOOTLOADER_OPTS_BIOS)
ROOTFS_ISO9660_OPTS += $(ROOTFS_ISO9660_OPTS_BIOS)
> +else ifeq ($(BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_ISO9660_EFI_BOOTLOADER),y)
> +ROOTFS_ISO9660_BOOTLOADER_OPTS = $(ROOTFS_ISO9660_BOOTLOADER_OPTS_EFI)
ROOTFS_ISO9660_OPTS += $(ROOTFS_ISO9660_OPTS_EFI)
> endif
>
> define ROOTFS_ISO9660_CMD
> $(HOST_DIR)/bin/xorriso -as mkisofs \
> $(ROOTFS_ISO9660_OPTS) \
> + $(ROOTFS_ISO9660_BOOTLOADER_OPTS) \
And thus you don't need the new variable here.
Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.
> -o $@ $(ROOTFS_ISO9660_TMP_TARGET_DIR)
> endef
>
> --
> 2.25.1
>
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot@lists.buildroot.org
> https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
--
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
| Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ |
| +33 561 099 427 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-27 21:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-23 15:57 [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 0/7] Add support for ISO9660 image compatible with Legacy and EFI BIOS Kory Maincent
2021-09-23 15:57 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 1/7] board, boot, package: remove usage of startup.nsh in EFI partition Kory Maincent
2021-09-23 20:06 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-09-24 20:28 ` Erico Nunes
2021-09-27 19:28 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-09-27 19:27 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-09-23 15:57 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 2/7] boot/grub2: add support to build multiple Grub2 configurations in the same build Kory Maincent
2021-09-27 19:42 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-10-06 18:11 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-10-07 8:23 ` Köry Maincent
2021-10-07 9:53 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-10-07 12:43 ` Köry Maincent
2021-10-07 16:29 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-10-08 8:20 ` Köry Maincent
2021-10-11 10:27 ` Köry Maincent
2021-10-14 20:02 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-10-14 20:27 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-10-14 20:48 ` Adam Duskett
2021-10-14 21:02 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-10-15 9:19 ` Köry Maincent
2021-10-15 9:28 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2021-10-15 20:50 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-10-19 16:30 ` Adam Duskett
2021-10-20 15:58 ` Köry Maincent
2021-09-23 15:57 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 3/7] fs/iso9660: add support to Grub EFI bootloader in the image Kory Maincent
2021-09-27 20:43 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-09-28 5:35 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-09-23 15:57 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 4/7] fs/iso9660: add support for hybrid image using Grub bootloader on BIOS and EFI Kory Maincent
2021-09-27 21:05 ` Yann E. MORIN [this message]
2021-09-29 8:23 ` Köry Maincent
2021-09-29 21:26 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-09-30 9:12 ` Köry Maincent
2021-09-23 15:57 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 5/7] support/testing/infra/emulator.py: update encoding when calling qemu Kory Maincent
2021-09-30 20:28 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-10-02 20:28 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-10-03 9:09 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2021-10-03 12:47 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-10-04 7:47 ` Köry Maincent
2021-10-06 14:59 ` Peter Korsgaard
2021-09-23 15:57 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 6/7] boot/edk2: add support to i386 architecture Kory Maincent
2021-09-30 19:51 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-10-03 12:49 ` Yann E. MORIN
2021-10-04 10:22 ` Köry Maincent
2021-09-23 15:57 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 7/7] support/testing/tests/fs/test_iso9660.py: add support to test using EFI BIOS Kory Maincent
2021-10-03 12:50 ` Yann E. MORIN
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210927210514.GF1504958@scaer \
--to=yann.morin.1998@free.fr \
--cc=buildroot@buildroot.org \
--cc=kory.maincent@bootlin.com \
--cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.