Syslinux - Feb 2006 - Booting UDF?

Greetings,
I wonder whether there are any plans to build udflinux or the likes. 
I've searched through the mailing list, finding out that should I create 
a mixed ISO9660/UDF filesystem.

Unfortunately, that is not an option if I want to use a significant 
feature of UDF filesystem, which is writing. Making a mixed ISO9660/UDF, 
using mkisofs -udf, will (to my best knowledge) not allow me to perform 
any writing. Creating the UDF filesystem using mkudffs does, however, it 
doesn't keep the ISO9660 part, therefore I can no longer boot it.

I wonder what should I do? With mkisofs, I cannot write; with mkudffs, I 
apparently cannot boot. Or is there a way out?

Thanks in advance
  -- iSteve

iSteve schreef:
> I wonder what should I do? With mkisofs, I cannot write; with mkudffs, 
> I apparently cannot boot. Or is there a way out?
Multisession perhaps? primary ISO9660, 2nd session UDF? No idea if it's 
possible.
> Thanks in advance
>  -- iSteve
Bernd

On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 11:24:54AM +0100, iSteve wrote:
> Greetings,
> I wonder whether there are any plans to build udflinux or the likes. 
> I've searched through the mailing list, finding out that should I
create
> a mixed ISO9660/UDF filesystem.
Is that the thread from 17 november 2005 ?
> Unfortunately, that is not an option if I want to use a significant 
> feature of UDF filesystem, which is writing. Making a mixed ISO9660/UDF, 
> using mkisofs -udf, will (to my best knowledge) not allow me to perform 
> any writing. Creating the UDF filesystem using mkudffs does, however, it 
> doesn't keep the ISO9660 part, therefore I can no longer boot it.
> 
> I wonder what should I do? With mkisofs, I cannot write; with mkudffs, I 
> apparently cannot boot. Or is there a way out?
The E-mail thread I'm referring ended with:
On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 12:09:05PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin
wrote:
> Jun OKAJIMA wrote:
> >
> >Yes, it is the UFD.
> >As above mentioned, UDF is an extension of ISO9660.
> >Then, current isolinux can handle UDF?
> >
> >                --- Okajima, Jun. Tokyo, Japan.
> >
>
> isolinux will just plain ignore UDF and try to read the disc as an
> iso9660 disc.  If your boot files are visible when the disc is mounted
> as plain iso9660 (-o norock,nojoliet), then it'll work fine.
>
>       -hpa
I hope that we get feed back this time.


HtH
GSt

Yes, that is the thread I'm reffering to.

However, no, when using mkudffs (which creates pure udf), I cannot mount 
it as iso9660 at all; I can only do that with mkisofs -udf (which 
creates mixed iso9660/udf). That is why I'm coming with broadly the same 
issue again.

  -- iSteve