From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1O5khb-0003Ci-8h for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 15:07:43 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1O5khY-0003Br-NO for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 15:07:40 -0400 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=40263 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O5khW-0003B4-Cv for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 15:07:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O5khU-0000lG-H0 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 15:07:38 -0400 Received: from mail-bw0-f223.google.com ([209.85.218.223]:64868) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O5khU-0000kz-2M for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 15:07:36 -0400 Received: by bwz23 with SMTP id 23so10905889bwz.26 for ; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 12:07:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-enigmail-version:content-type; bh=rSPmbahAp/Lf5q/tI0R8tatdsOBb15Oj8/8srHD9RjE=; b=GIQAEVT91bM60bDfdwExeopnPtGTwmdi9OMDb4fd2tgMFO7VzyMH91ibhl9nX/JZ8+ uBDWxLOf4ypVMfPyk0zQFKQ7BYFm3klbDJRcIxbulR7DJX+8pDZ3sqBy98asbjnW4yIL YgdZBDhCkSf/Nv6KJvStyh4+rRI6Tj2q3kTRg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type; b=rSQCAbhqjThc2tOsDSEcY0wugwLkHM/mFl8jX5vfDhK5Ikl9stOH6u+WNX8tOQ8jX/ QwrBqtliI3Sgegz/VHbDe9zlZconMpVt9NEIbnCtYx4hjTZLiRxv0hCOditMyPeU/8aZ juUqlZXFSmGbYWFq0d4OobDh67f5c+r7rZcsQ= Received: by 10.204.13.68 with SMTP id b4mr1086902bka.133.1272136054987; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 12:07:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from debian.bg45.phnet (39-210.2-85.cust.bluewin.ch [85.2.210.39]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 14sm913535bwz.6.2010.04.24.12.07.32 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 24 Apr 2010 12:07:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4BD3416B.7040401@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2010 21:07:23 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?VmxhZGltaXIgJ8+GLWNvZGVyL3BoY29kZXInIFNlcmJpbmVua28=?= User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20091109) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: The development of GNU GRUB References: <4BCD962C.5010603@gmail.com> <10646747054989@192.168.2.69> In-Reply-To: <10646747054989@192.168.2.69> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig49941FC5077E45326C7711FA" X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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: Sat, 24 Apr 2010 19:07:41 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig49941FC5077E45326C7711FA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > the fresh development upload of xorriso-0.5.5 > with timestamp 2010.04.22.160615 implements the > wish about --efi-boot : > > =20 I've tested xorriso version : 0.5.5 Version timestamp :=20 2010.04.22.221241 and it worked fine. > Vladimir Serbinenko wrote 17 Apr 2010: > =20 >> I would like to have efi+bios cd with 2 eltorito >> entries: one with platformid=3D0 and another one with platformid=3D0xe= f. >> [...] >> I would like that on hybrid BIOS always come in >> default entry to avoid hitting BIOS bugs >> In case of just EFI the Section header entry and Section entry become >> Validation entry and default entry. >> =20 > > So now xorriso -as mkisofs has this provisory > behavior: > > -b is for 80x86 BIOS images, platform ID 0. > Options -boot-load-size, -no-emul-boot, > -boot-info-table affect this -b boot image. > > --efi-boot is for EFI images, platform id 0xef. > Hardcoded are: no emulation, no boot info table. > The load size is obtained from the size of the > EFI image file and rounded up to full 512 byte > blocks. > > Prone to change is the current rule that the > EFI image always is second if a BIOS image is > present. I will probably make this depending on > the sequence of options in future. > Please take care in grub-mkrescue to express > your desired sorting by giving -b before > --efi-boot. > > =20 It's already so. > ------------------------------------------------ > > > Quote from El Torito 1.0 paragraph 2.3 > "The section header has an identification string. > If the BIOS understands the ID, string it may > choose to boot the system using one of these > entries in place of the INITIAL/DEFAULT entry." > > =20 > What does that mean: "the BIOS understands" ? > Do we have to write something particular in > there for EFI ? > Any idea what one would have to write in case of > a 80x86-BIOS image ? > =20 It looks like ISOs I had under the hand with multiple boot images just zero-fill this field. > The Validation Entry has an ID too. > But that is defined as quite meaningless: > "This is intended to identify the > manufacturer/developer of the CD-ROM." > > =20 Actualy it seems like it can be an arbitrary string and BIOS doesn't care about it. Just setting it to all zeros is ok. Looking at few isos I had under the hand: FreeBSD ISOs: "The FreeBSD Project. h" NetBSD: "" DEbian GNU/Hurd: "" > =20 > ------------------------------------------------ > > > Currently libisofs is able to write and read up > to 32 boot images. It writes each image entry > into an own section, but i plan to allow sections > of more than one image entry and user provided > ID strings. > > xorriso on the other hand got only a primitive > extension efi_path, which lives beneath bin_path. > This is not flexible. So i plan for improvements. > Nevertheless, the option sequence > -b ... --efi-boot ... > is promised to always lead to Vladimir's intended > boot catalog structure. > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > I tested with dummy boot images. > The boot catalog entries seem to be ok. > Now i am curious whether i misunderstood the > specs somewhere or whether it really would boot. > > > Have a nice day :) > > Thomas > > > > _______________________________________________ > Grub-devel mailing list > Grub-devel@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel > > =20 --=20 Regards Vladimir '=CF=86-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko --------------enig49941FC5077E45326C7711FA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iF4EAREKAAYFAkvTQXEACgkQNak7dOguQgm/MgEAvgEmQd1mfxhViwwz1jaBB/Jy eZhdDi0hFKgokSNBI/sA/iqQlqoC0o9uLwSY45Qk5ABZ/SZqJNEvD7hlMItqsSFA =Jr+z -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig49941FC5077E45326C7711FA--