similar to: Syslinux - MultiFS support (demonstration/details)

From: Raphael S. Carvalho <raphael.scarv at gmail.com> This patch finishes the MultiFS support. init_multifs gets called in the main (startup) function of ldlinux.c32, so MultiFS will be initialized automatically. init_multifs calls enable_multifs (lives in the core) to hook get_fs_info. Subsequent accesses will callback the get_fs_info living in ldlinux.c32. Signed-off-by: Raphael S.

Ady, Peter, et al. On Fri, July 24, 2015 5:28 pm, Ady via Syslinux wrote: > >> On 07/23/2015 02:09 PM, Raphael S Carvalho via Syslinux wrote: >> >> >> > My sincere opinion is to apply this patchset as-is, and incrementally >> > improve multifs. Lack of alternatives (additional features) *should >> not* be >> > a reason to block this patchset.

On 20.12.2015 09:55, poma wrote: > ... > > Syslinux MultiFS test: > > - QEMU/KVM SeaBIOS: PASSED > - Bare-metal BIOS: FAILED [1] > - OVMF: FAILED [2] > - Bare-metal UEFI: not tested > > > [1] stalled: > Loading (hd3,2)/vmlinuz-4.3.2-200.fc22.x86_64... > > > [2] "failed: No such file or directory" > >

It would be good to clean it up so out can be used for both. Just teach it that ) ends the parse. On June 4, 2014 2:06:22 PM PDT, Raphael S Carvalho <raphael.scarv at gmail.com> wrote: >On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 5:36 PM, Raphael S Carvalho ><raphael.scarv at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 5:21 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> wrote: >>> On

On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 6:17 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> wrote: > It would be good to clean it up so out can be used for both. Just teach it that ) ends the parse. Sounds reasonable, I will do that! > > On June 4, 2014 2:06:22 PM PDT, Raphael S Carvalho <raphael.scarv at gmail.com> wrote: >>On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 5:36 PM, Raphael S Carvalho

From: Raphael S. Carvalho <raphael.scarv at gmail.com> MULTIFS SYNTAX: (hd[disk number]:[partition number])/path/to/file The meaning of this_fs was changed to improve the flexibility of the support. Now, this_fs means the file system being currently used. root_fs was created to save the context of the main file system (where ldlinux.sys lives in). get_fs_info is a function pointer that

Raphael, Except for the : instead of the , this looks like the grub hard disk nomenclature that's been around for a thousand years. Certainly since early GRUB1. Example: (hd0,0)/grub/splash.xpm.gz Why did you chose : instead of grub's , ? I'm guessing (like grub) that disks & partitions are 0-based? (Were the original grub authors European?) Spike #Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014

On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 5:36 PM, Raphael S Carvalho <raphael.scarv at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 5:21 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> wrote: >> On 06/04/2014 11:09 AM, Raphael S Carvalho wrote: >>> Before proceeding with the MultiFS patchset, let's discuss the MultiFS syntax. >>> >>> It's currently as follows:

On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 5:21 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> wrote: > On 06/04/2014 11:09 AM, Raphael S Carvalho wrote: >> Before proceeding with the MultiFS patchset, let's discuss the MultiFS syntax. >> >> It's currently as follows: >> (hd[disk number]:[partition number])/path/to/file >> >> Any objections? >> > > As others

... Syslinux MultiFS test: - QEMU/KVM SeaBIOS: PASSED - Bare-metal BIOS: FAILED [1] - OVMF: FAILED [2] - Bare-metal UEFI: not tested [1] stalled: Loading (hd3,2)/vmlinuz-4.3.2-200.fc22.x86_64... [2] "failed: No such file or directory" http://git.zytor.com/users/pcacjr/syslinux.git/tree/core/include/multifs.h?h=multifs-for-upstream#n27 * MULTIFS SYNTAX: * (hd[disk

> On 07/23/2015 02:09 PM, Raphael S Carvalho via Syslinux wrote: > >> > > My sincere opinion is to apply this patchset as-is, and incrementally > > improve multifs. Lack of alternatives (additional features) *should not* be > > a reason to block this patchset. Again, I really think that this patchset > > should be applied unless a technical reason, e.g. some

On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 3:56 PM, H. Peter Anvin via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote: > On 07/23/2015 02:09 PM, Raphael S Carvalho via Syslinux wrote: >>> >> My sincere opinion is to apply this patchset as-is, and incrementally >> improve multifs. Lack of alternatives (additional features) *should not* be >> a reason to block this patchset. Again, I really

So last week I was wondering if XFS was still working -- even with its last on-disk structure changes -- and it _suprisingly_ worked as expected. Right, now I can finally get rid of GRUB and use Syslinux to boot my Linux on EFI from a rootfs with xfs. Shit, I have two partitions (the first one being the required ESP) so there is no way to access the other partitions since because Syslinux does not

2015-10-08 0:16 UTC+02:00, Geert Stappers via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com>: > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:40:14PM -0300, Raphael S Carvalho via Syslinux > wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:58 PM, Paulo Alcantara via Syslinux < >> syslinux at zytor.com> wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > My name is Paulo Alcantara. I've been working

On 09/02/15 10:59, Gene Cumm via Syslinux wrote: > On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 3:56 PM, H. Peter Anvin via Syslinux > <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote: >> On 07/23/2015 02:09 PM, Raphael S Carvalho via Syslinux wrote: >>>> >>> My sincere opinion is to apply this patchset as-is, and incrementally >>> improve multifs. Lack of alternatives (additional

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 11:15 PM, Ady via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote: > > > The MultiFS syntax is basically "(hdX,Y)/path/to/file", where X is disk > > number and Y is partition number. > > > > Thank you. > > As a reminder, please note: > > _ There was a syntax discussion about "multifs", so additional syntax > forms

Before proceeding with the MultiFS patchset, let's discuss the MultiFS syntax. It's currently as follows: (hd[disk number]:[partition number])/path/to/file Any objections? Regards, Raphael S. Carvalho

On 06/04/2014 11:09 AM, Raphael S Carvalho wrote: > Before proceeding with the MultiFS patchset, let's discuss the MultiFS syntax. > > It's currently as follows: > (hd[disk number]:[partition number])/path/to/file > > Any objections? > As others have pointed out, I'd rather use a comma, but even more specifically, we already *have* a very sophisticated syntax

On 07/23/2015 02:09 PM, Raphael S Carvalho via Syslinux wrote: >> > My sincere opinion is to apply this patchset as-is, and incrementally > improve multifs. Lack of alternatives (additional features) *should not* be > a reason to block this patchset. Again, I really think that this patchset > should be applied unless a technical reason, e.g. some deficiency > introduced by one

Searching threads back to 2013-07-01 (date of last message on thread), I've come up with the folloowing: -Needs review for inclusion: 12/26 Init cache once 11/27 efi PE header set 11/21 FSUUID for ext2 filesystem 10/15 Upgrade to Lua 5.2.2, add filesystem module and get_key binding (21) 09/23 com32: hdt: fix memory leak 10/3/12-12/16 4k sector support 10/18 MultiFS from MultiDisk 10/07 Lua