From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnout Vandecappelle Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 21:51:28 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 8/9] boot/syslinux: add option to install the EFI image In-Reply-To: <20140428194516.GF3501@free.fr> References: <535DF2CD.3000100@mind.be> <20140428171514.GA3501@free.fr> <535EA927.3080701@mind.be> <20140428194516.GF3501@free.fr> Message-ID: <535EB140.1010606@mind.be> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On 28/04/14 21:45, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > Arnout, All, > > On 2014-04-28 21:16 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle spake thusly: >> On 28/04/14 19:15, Yann E. MORIN wrote: >>> Arnout, All, >>> >>> On 2014-04-28 08:18 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle spake thusly: >>>> On 25/04/14 00:30, Yann E. MORIN wrote: >>>>> From: "Yann E. MORIN" >> [snip] >>>>> +choice >>>>> + bool "Image type" >>>> >>>> Why is this a choice? It's possible to build both, no? Similar to >>>> iso/pxe. So it makes more sense to me to add efi as a third option after >>>> iso and pxe. >>> >>> Well, the target will be either BIOS-based or an EFI-based, not both. >>> So it seems more logical to make it a choice (Thomas seemed to agree on >>> IRC, as well.) >>> >>> But thinking of it, we could go even further: iso/pxe/mbr/efi are all >>> _alternate_ methods of booting, so it does not make sense to have more >>> than one selected at any one time. >>> >>> The only reason pxe/iso are not a choice _currently_ (e.g. syslinux-4.0.7), >>> is that they are always built, and there is a no way to only build one or >>> the other. This is the same behaviour in 6.0.2: you can build any >>> combination of {bios,efi32,efi64} (only one, two, or all of them). But >>> bios will always build pxe and iso (and mbr, see next cset). >> >> Good point. But then of course, it also doesn't make sense to build both >> U-Boot and syslinux :-) >> >> So I'm OK with making iso/pxe/mbr/efi a choice. >> >> When syslinux/extlinux is added, that does add some difficulty because >> those can be combined with mbr. But that can be tackled when the problem >> arises :-). > > Not really, because extlinux is a host tools that prepares a partition > to be booted from the mbr blob. > > Here is the way you'd use extlinux: > - prepare a device with at least one partition > - format that partition as ext2/3/4 > - run extlinux on that partition > -> extlinux installs some files in that filesystem > -> and then installs a special boot-record as the first sector of > the partition (yes, the first sector of an ext2/3/4 FS is free > to use) > - dump the mbr.bin blob as the MBR (eg. on the first sector of the > partition) > > So, we need not add an option of extlinux since it is not an image like > pxelinux or isolinux, but really a host tool. Yes, of course, thanks for the explanation. Next time I'll try to think first :-) Regards, Arnout > > The addition of the mbr option in patch #9 is just so it is possible to > indeed use extlinux. > > Note: the initial patch that prompted me to write this series did try to > install extlinux to $(IMAGE_DIR) but that's plain wrong; see: > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/306958/ > > Regards, > Yann E. MORIN. > -- Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500 Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle GPG fingerprint: 7CB5 E4CC 6C2E EFD4 6E3D A754 F963 ECAB 2450 2F1F