search for: bootx32

Wondering what the best process would be to create livecds using the newer version of syslinux. Currently my G4L project has just been upgraded to syslinux 5.10 and works fine with regular 32 and 64 bit systems using the 32bit kernels, but have seen comments about EFI and somethings about 32bit only working with 32bit and 64bit with 64bit? Since I average about 1,000 downloads per week, I

.../isolinux.bin \ -no-emul-boot -boot-load-size 4 -boot-info-table \ -eltorito-alt-boot \ -e isolinux/efiboot.img -no-emul-boot -eltorito-alt-boot \ -e isolinux/macboot.img -eltorito-id "MAC" -no-emul-boot \ ../src isolinux/efiboot.img is a vfat image that contains: * EFI/BOOT/bootx32.efi - created with grub2-mkimage * EFI/BOOT/grub.cfg - standard grub.cfg isolinux/macboot.img is a bit more complicated but if you don't need your iso to boot on macosx hardware you can ommit this flag. This file contains: * .VolumeIcon.icns - icon for EFI boot image in macosx * EFI/BOOT/BOO...

...with regular 32 and 64 bit systems using the 32bit > kernels, but have seen comments about EFI and somethings > about 32bit only working with 32bit and 64bit with 64bit? EFI looks for a 64bit loader /efi/boot/bootx64.efi by default on 64bit machines, and looks for a 32bit loader /efi/boot/bootx32.efi by default on 32bit machines. Both can be renamed from the right bitness version of syslinux.efi (plus ldlinux.e32 and ldlinux.e64). My own experiments showed that the current GIT version of syslinux.efi will only start the kernel with a matching bitness, otherwise it crashes and in the best c...

...change it (thus *forcing* users to change too). If that would be the case, then seeing "COM32" in a cfg file when booting BIOS-based x86_64 hardware might also be a problem (and this is not new). Another example: the UEFI specification using "BOOTIA32.EFI" instead of "BOOTX32.EFI". If the "32" (or "64") would have an actual impact, then by all means. But the file name extension for Syslinux modules could had been ".xyz" (or anything else), and we would have the same directory / naming conflict when using modules for multiple firmwa...

On 04/23/2014 05:27 PM, Ady wrote: > OK then, so let's review the situation a little more accurately. > > _ Goal: to be able to keep searching for: > > pxelinux.cfg/01-88-99-aa-bb-cc-dd > pxelinux.cfg/C000025B > pxelinux.cfg/C000025 > pxelinux.cfg/C00002 > pxelinux.cfg/C0000 > pxelinux.cfg/C000 > pxelinux.cfg/C00 > pxelinux.cfg/C0 > pxelinux.cfg/C >

I've been using various versions of syslinux as the boot loader for the g4l project that I have been the maintainer of since 2004. It was already using syslinux, so I've just updated it over the years, and currently have it use 5.10 version, but have done test builds with the 6.x versions. Recently had request from to users about EFI support, and one suggested that virtualbox has