similar to: pxelinux 3.09 LOCALBOOT does not work (v3.07 does)

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "pxelinux 3.09 LOCALBOOT does not work (v3.07 does)"

2008 Aug 31
1
[RFC][PATCH] ui: label completion on tab key
This implements the label completion on tab key idea. It does introduce "labelcompl" as new config keyword. The default value is 0 so it does not change current behaviour. If you press tab with an empty command line it will display all labels. If the command line contains any characters it will display the matching labels. This patch is only intended for testing since i didn't check
2006 Mar 30
0
PXE Linux (Simple Menu) freeze after pressing 23 times return
Yes it sounds silly, but its true. I made a menu with some submenu with the simple menu system. After pressing 23 times return to get into the submenu or back to the mainmenu it freeze. I think this is a bug of syslinux. I tried it on 3 different PC/Servers always the same effect. Here is my default and one of my submenu files: default: #Projekt PXE-Boot von Franz Lang www.franz-lang.com
2014 May 07
0
Issues with syslinux_run_command(str) and parameters
> >> > >> >From the perspective of a final user, breaking the prior behavior of > >> directives needs to have very clear advantages. > > > > Reviewing the commit history, I would say that the prior behavior is currently broken. > > > > The ALLOWOPTIONS feature was added in 2004: > >
2012 May 04
3
[GIT PULL] elflink fixes
Peter, Paulo reported some problems with his config files under ISOLINUX and PXELINUX - basically TIMEOUT and TOTALTIMEOUT were broken. The patches I've pushed to the elflink branch fix this and also fix parsing of the ALLOWOPTIONS config directive. The following changes since commit d5e02fb16a11bfdbce1e90a39e6cb5f2ad925389: get_key: Valid key values are positive (2012-04-17 11:25:53
2019 Apr 22
1
Bug/limitation: allowoptions (for label), implicit (for automated)
Hello, At the boot prompt ALLOWOPTIONS 0 is only applied to implicit kernels and not to labels. For configuration which want to allow selection, but prevent customization of the kernel command line, this behaviour is bad. Also the IMPLICIT 0 is applied to both the boot prompt and configuration setting (like DEFAULT); but one could argue that only the command supplied at the prompt make sense to
2014 Apr 30
0
Issues with syslinux_run_command(str) and parameters
I don't think that's it, but fair enough, try this sample config: ************************************************# Test File: isolinux.cfg default vesamenu.c32 ALLOWOPTIONS 0 LABEL Test kernel whichsys.c32 append -iso- memdisk initrd=fdboot.img -sys- initrd=fdboot.img MENU END************************************************ I am using binaries from 6.03-pre11 from kernel.org. I used
2014 Apr 30
2
Issues with syslinux_run_command(str) and parameters
Apologies for how that formatted. Also on pastebin: http://pastebin.com/EXSq75yX --Ian > From: ian at internals.io > To: ady-sf at hotmail.com; syslinux at zytor.com > Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 19:09:09 -0500 > Subject: Re: [syslinux] Issues with syslinux_run_command(str) and parameters > > I don't think that's it, but fair enough, try this sample config: >
2013 Jun 26
0
Syslinux 6.00 released
Hallo, Matt, Du meintest am 25.06.13: >> Not really... let's just document "make bios". > There's preliminary documentation in doc/building.txt. (sent to you and to the mailing list; some robot blocks the list ...) Additionally: Compiling (with "make bios") worked. Running "pxelinux": more problems than with 5.10. 5.00-pre6: all worked fine
2013 Jun 26
1
Syslinux 6.00 released
> Hallo, Matt, > > Du meintest am 25.06.13: > > >> Not really... let's just document "make bios". > > > There's preliminary documentation in doc/building.txt. > > (sent to you and to the mailing list; some robot blocks the list ...) > > Additionally: > > Compiling (with "make bios") worked. > > Running
2014 Jul 13
1
ALLOWOPTIONS directive
My summary: reviewing ALLOWOPTIONS found reasons for further reviewing 'ALLOWOPTIONS' Op 2014-07-12 om 04:35 schreef Ady: > > > I have some questions about "ALLOWOPTIONS 0". > > > > [quote] > > ALLOWOPTIONS flag_val > > If flag_val is 0, the user is not allowed to specify any arguments on > > the kernel command line. The only
2005 Dec 02
3
PxeLinux menu.c32 chaining
Hello, many of our platforms do not have a integrated floppy, some even don''t have a floppy controller. As pxelinux still has a problem with machines without a floppy in combination with some bios versions I need to chainload a different bootstrap loader which works on the floppyless platforms. But I also need to load a BartPE and the other BS loader does not support that. So I tried to
2014 Jul 12
0
ALLOWOPTIONS directive
> I have some questions about "ALLOWOPTIONS 0". > > [quote] > ALLOWOPTIONS flag_val > If flag_val is 0, the user is not allowed to specify any arguments on > the kernel command line. The only options recognized are those > specified in an APPEND) statement. The default is 1. > [/quote] > > My understanding of the behavior of "ALLOWOPTIONS 0"
2008 Dec 24
1
Need help
Hi, I'm facing some problems with pxelinux. I have ingetrated it into WDS server. I want to use Network boot all way possible. I want to add Hiren boot disk and NT password editor tools. Is this possible? Currently my network boot includes WDS, Linux install, Win98 Startup disk and ghost 11.5 wPS-DOS. My conf file as follows(*) Also in hyperv virtual machines(x64) pxelinux.com displays
2004 Oct 07
0
NT4 Domain Member Server Access Denied v3.07
I want to set up a Samba Server (Cactus_3) as member server in our NT4 domain (PDC is Cactus_1, BDC is Cactus_2). We have about 50 client workstations most of which are WinXP but we have a few Win2K and Win98 machines. Shortly we will migrate off the NT4 servers but in the meantime we wish to test some real time scenarios. It is for this reason that I want SSO so the tests are transparant
2014 May 07
0
Issues with syslinux_run_command(str) and parameters
Op 2014-05-05 om 23:20 schreef Ady: > > > I didn't see any further communication here; would anyone be > > against my submitting/proposing a patch for this? > > Contributions are always welcome. > > > > > I can see two possible approaches. One approach would be to > > isolate the restriction on user commands away from > > syslinux_run_command /
2014 Jun 26
2
ALLOWOPTIONS directive
I have some questions about "ALLOWOPTIONS 0". [quote] ALLOWOPTIONS flag_val If flag_val is 0, the user is not allowed to specify any arguments on the kernel command line. The only options recognized are those specified in an APPEND) statement. The default is 1. [/quote] My understanding of the behavior of "ALLOWOPTIONS 0" is that unless I type-in a command that is exactly
2008 Oct 13
6
Strange Lockup
Hi All, We seem to have a strange problem with our NEC ML4 pcs. When using pxelinux to network boot, we are getting our menu (using menu.c32) when we choose a option the machine just locks up. If the option requires a password it shows the password box , I put in the password and then it locks up. But strangely the machine will boot from local disk which is an option on the boot menu. Our
2014 May 05
0
Issues with syslinux_run_command(str) and parameters
I didn't see any further communication here; would anyone be against my submitting/proposing a patch for this? I can see two possible approaches. One approach would be to isolate the restriction on user commands away from syslinux_run_command / load_kernel. Another would perhaps be to add support for a 'NOTAB' or 'NOTABTOEDIT' option. There already exists a NOESCAPE
2006 Mar 10
1
Add_Item Help
I was using the simple menu with this configuration: DEFAULT MyMenu PROMPT 1 TIMEOUT 10 ONTIMEOUT LocalBoot ALLOWOPTIONS 0 IMPLICIT 0 NOESCAPE 1 MENU MAST PASSWD <password_omitted> MENU TITLE Bootable Options: LABEL MyMenu MENU HIDE KERNEL pxelinux.cfg/menu.c32 label Remote Instalation Server kernel memdisk/memdisk append initrd=RisMenus/RisDisk.IMg Now I'm
2014 May 05
2
Issues with syslinux_run_command(str) and parameters
> I didn't see any further communication here; would anyone be > against my submitting/proposing a patch for this? Contributions are always welcome. > > I can see two possible approaches. One approach would be to > isolate the restriction on user commands away from > syslinux_run_command / load_kernel. > > Another would perhaps be to add support for a