> > As opposed to "label", > "dlabel" ... > https://github.com/ErwanAliasr1/syslinux/commit/ebf8cbf > > SeaBIOS / GRUB2 > > ... > ... > <target dev='vdc' bus='virtio'/> > <boot order='3'/> > ... > ... > <target dev='vdd' bus='virtio'/> > <boot order='4'/> > ... > ... > > > # gdisk -l /dev/vdc > ... > Partition table scan: > MBR: protective > BSD: not present > APM: not present > GPT: present > > Found valid GPT with protective MBR; using GPT. > Disk /dev/vdc: ... > ... > Number Start (sector) End (sector) Size Code Name > 1 2048 6143 2.0 MiB EF02 BIOS_Boot > 2 411648 1435647 500.0 MiB 8300 GPT_Boot > 3 1435648 22646783 10.1 GiB 8300 GPT_Root > 4 22646784 25163775 1.2 GiB 8200 GPT_Swap > > > > # gdisk -l /dev/vdd > ... > Partition table scan: > MBR: protective > BSD: not present > APM: not present > GPT: present > > Found valid GPT with protective MBR; using GPT. > Disk /dev/vdd: ... > ... > Number Start (sector) End (sector) Size Code Name > 1 2048 6143 2.0 MiB EF02 BIOS_Boot_2 > 2 411648 1435647 500.0 MiB 8300 GPT_Boot_2 > 3 1435648 22646783 10.1 GiB 8300 GPT_Root_2 > 4 22646784 25163775 1.2 GiB 8200 GPT_Swap_2 > > > > /boot/extlinux/extlinux.conf > ... > label localboot > com32 chain.c32 > append dlabel=GPT_Root > > label localboot 2 > com32 chain.c32 > append dlabel=GPT_Root_2 > ... > > OR > boot: chain dlabel=GPT_Root > OR > boot: chain dlabel=GPT_Root_2 > OR > boot: chain dlabel=VanillaStrawberry > OR > boot: chain dlabel=literallywhateverentered > > > The result is always the same, > selected for boot is always drive with a higher boot priority, > in this case - vdc > >A couple of comments about this test that might be relevant. First, LABEL directives (nothing to do with any "label" related to chain.c32) should not include spaces (e.g. "localboot 2" should not be used for a LABEL directive). Now, regarding your 2 entries (i.e. LABELs) in extlinux.conf, what else is there? Would you please try using 'dlabel=GPT_Root_2' as your fist (LABEL) entry and as the DEFAULT label command? The reason I am requesting this is because Fedora (which you usually use for your tests, IIRC) 24 was released without a patch in Syslinux for gcc5+ (which solves this strange behavior in the Syslinux boot prompt). Although Rawhide already includes the relevant patch for Syslinux's CLI, it is still not updated to the very latest / current Syslinux git master head (only updated to 6.04-pre1). I guess the important question would be whether this test was performed from the current upstream Syslinux git master head + Erwan's patch, or rather from some older snapshot / build / version (+ Erwan's patch). If the former, then the problem in CLI seems to be back (in which case, the version of gcc being used to build these binaries might be a relevant detail). Regards, Ady.
On 17.07.2016 17:21, Ady Ady via Syslinux wrote:>> >> As opposed to "label", >> "dlabel" ... >> https://github.com/ErwanAliasr1/syslinux/commit/ebf8cbf >> >> SeaBIOS / GRUB2 >> >> ... >> ... >> <target dev='vdc' bus='virtio'/> >> <boot order='3'/> >> ... >> ... >> <target dev='vdd' bus='virtio'/> >> <boot order='4'/> >> ... >> ... >> >> >> # gdisk -l /dev/vdc >> ... >> Partition table scan: >> MBR: protective >> BSD: not present >> APM: not present >> GPT: present >> >> Found valid GPT with protective MBR; using GPT. >> Disk /dev/vdc: ... >> ... >> Number Start (sector) End (sector) Size Code Name >> 1 2048 6143 2.0 MiB EF02 BIOS_Boot >> 2 411648 1435647 500.0 MiB 8300 GPT_Boot >> 3 1435648 22646783 10.1 GiB 8300 GPT_Root >> 4 22646784 25163775 1.2 GiB 8200 GPT_Swap >> >> >> >> # gdisk -l /dev/vdd >> ... >> Partition table scan: >> MBR: protective >> BSD: not present >> APM: not present >> GPT: present >> >> Found valid GPT with protective MBR; using GPT. >> Disk /dev/vdd: ... >> ... >> Number Start (sector) End (sector) Size Code Name >> 1 2048 6143 2.0 MiB EF02 BIOS_Boot_2 >> 2 411648 1435647 500.0 MiB 8300 GPT_Boot_2 >> 3 1435648 22646783 10.1 GiB 8300 GPT_Root_2 >> 4 22646784 25163775 1.2 GiB 8200 GPT_Swap_2 >> >> >> >> /boot/extlinux/extlinux.conf >> ... >> label localboot >> com32 chain.c32 >> append dlabel=GPT_Root >> >> label localboot 2 >> com32 chain.c32 >> append dlabel=GPT_Root_2 >> ... >> >> OR >> boot: chain dlabel=GPT_Root >> OR >> boot: chain dlabel=GPT_Root_2 >> OR >> boot: chain dlabel=VanillaStrawberry >> OR >> boot: chain dlabel=literallywhateverentered >> >> >> The result is always the same, >> selected for boot is always drive with a higher boot priority, >> in this case - vdc >> >> > > A couple of comments about this test that might be relevant. > > First, LABEL directives (nothing to do with any "label" related to > chain.c32) should not include spaces (e.g. "localboot 2" should not be > used for a LABEL directive). > > Now, regarding your 2 entries (i.e. LABELs) in extlinux.conf, what else > is there? Would you please try using 'dlabel=GPT_Root_2' as your fist > (LABEL) entry and as the DEFAULT label command? >If it does not work via prompt: boot: chain option=foobar then it does not work.> The reason I am requesting this is because Fedora (which you usually > use for your tests, IIRC) 24 was released without a patch in Syslinux > for gcc5+ (which solves this strange behavior in the Syslinux boot > prompt). Although Rawhide already includes the relevant patch for > Syslinux's CLI, it is still not updated to the very latest / current > Syslinux git master head (only updated to 6.04-pre1). > > I guess the important question would be whether this test was performed > from the current upstream Syslinux git master head + Erwan's patch, or > rather from some older snapshot / build / version (+ Erwan's patch). If > the former, then the problem in CLI seems to be back (in which case, > the version of gcc being used to build these binaries might be a > relevant detail).http://goo.gl/Gm4ffO boot/
> > If it does not work via prompt: > boot: chain option=foobar > then it does not work. >Generally speaking, that statement is inaccurate. If you are going to answer no question - hmm, maybe there was some valid reason to ask them - and you intend to ignore what has been written, I wonder what would be the point of using my time on this.