similar to: [LLVMdev] Question on X86-64 ABI support?

I've found a way to support PXE booting both UEFI and BIOS architectures with Windows Server DHCP. This method uses a feature introduced in WinServer 2012: DHCP policies. First, in the the DHCP console, at the IPv4 root of the server, create a vendor class named PXEClient (UEFI x64) with the following value: PXEClient:Arch:00007 Then create your configuration for your BIOS clients in your

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" > >

A small how-to for encapsulating option 210 inside option 43 on Windows DHCP servers would be welcome then :-) And as far as UEFI x86 system go, one would simply have to create another vendor class with the value PXEClient:Arch:00006 On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 12:05 AM, Gene Cumm <gene.cumm at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:52 PM, Alexandre Blanchette > <blanalex at

> I'm having an issue getting a C6.6 install to work on a 3 TB dual hard >drive system, raid 0. I'm hoping that someone here can help. 1: Is this system booting UEFI or BIOS? 2: Is the disk partitioned with MBR or GPT? 3: Is /boot on its own partition? 3TB drives are larger than MBR and BIOS properly support, so they're only really expected to work on a system partitioned with

I?ll explain what?s happening first, and list the steps after that. First: pep is short for the Xen target x86_64-pep. It?s a target you can enable when configuring Xen to create an EFI binary. What is happening with Xen on UEFI via Grub is that it doesn?t give the kernel any info on the ACPI root pointer. Basically, this means that Linux won?t be able to do ACPI, and therefore a ton of hardware

> Hi, > > Ady wrote: > > This could be misinterpreted by some users as: "if > > you want to build an isohybrid image, then you cannot use > > 'syslinux.efi'". This would be incorrect. > > I don't know whether syslinux.efi can be used for booting > from ISO 9660 via UEFI. Currently there is no example > around which would succeed

Not all UEFI guests can survive conversion, because of lost bootloader information in UEFI NVRAM. But some guest can cope with this because they have a fallback bootloader and use UEFI Removable Media Boot Behavior. (see https://uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/UEFI_Spec_2_8_A_Feb14.pdf 3.5.1.1 Removable Media Boot Behavior) to load. If UEFI firmware can't find a bootloader in its

Commit 889386f8c6088e57fd68f2bb6bf85f69ecfc6f6c removed most of them already, so remove the last ones, and the supporting code. --- generator/UEFI.ml | 6 ------ v2v/utils.ml | 1 - 2 files changed, 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/generator/UEFI.ml b/generator/UEFI.ml index 5161e28ee..1ff3f84d2 100644 --- a/generator/UEFI.ml +++ b/generator/UEFI.ml @@ -30,12 +30,6 @@ open Docstrings (* Order

> Hello, > > Ady via Syslinux said on Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 08:15:37PM +0200: > >_ Creating filesystem that _does_ conform to ISO-9660; > > I think the only issue is with a tag. That same image boots with grub > 0.99 I understand. My point is, in theory, "everything" is frequently expected to work as it was designed; in practice, it is not. So my suggestions

> Hi, > > Pascal wrote: > > mkisofs -o core.iso -b boot/core.img -c boot/boot.cat -hard-disk-boot core/ > > my iso image is ok with qemu on bios and uefi, > > Astounding. As CD-ROM this is not supposed to work with UEFI unless the > firmware emulates BIOS. What particular UEFI firmware did you use ? > > > and with qemu as hard disk on uefi but not on

Hi, Ok, when can we then anticipate pxe-chaining to be possible with syslinux under the UEFI architecture? Are there any plans to implement both correct interfacing to UEFI as well as the issue of arbitrary UEFI images? Haven't tried to read the UEFI-specification as it is sub 3000-pages long, so I am a bit in the dark as to the changes in architecture from BIOS to UEFI. It has been

Hi, On 13/11/2014 19:17, Ady wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 11/11/2014 02:55, Ady wrote: >> > Again, dd'ing your isohybrid image onto your (virtual or real) drive >> > will fail to boot in EFI mode. Your "syslinux.efi-based" >> > "/isolinux/efiboot.img" will not be capable of booting. This is one >> > of the steps

All, I realize this is not strictly a PXELINUX question. So I hope you'll indulge me; hopefully some of these PXELINUX experts have seen this before. And can tell me what I'm doing wrong. Or confirm my suspicions. I have a test lab server at work. Split config. The network team manages the DHCP servers, points to our TFTP server. Test subnet has 3 DHCP pools. BIOS PXE, UEFI PXE and

> > I am still interested in improving the isohybrid wiki > and will watch for pointers to descriptions of the FAT > production process (with GRUB/GRUB2 if not with SYSLINUX). > > If no such descriptions appear within the next weeks, > then i plan to state in > http://www.syslinux.org/wiki/index.php/Isohybrid#UEFI > > "The SYSLINUX project cannot yet provide

Ady, There are at least 3 ways to set up your DHCP server to differentiate between std DHCP, BIOS PXE and UEFI PXE. Option 93 (arch) is one way. In ISC syntax, here's 3 ways: 1. Match on VCI class "pxe-clients" { match if substring (option vendor-class-identifier, 0, 9) = "PXEClient"; set vendor-string = substring ( option vendor-class-identifier, 0, 9);

On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Patrick Masotta via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote: >>>>> > website (meaning, HP could test their firmware to be compatible with > Syslinux and with non-Windows OSes). If the HP firmware could be made > (more) compliant with UEFI specs, or if it could be improved and still > be compliant with UEFI specs, wouldn't

Hi, i wrote: > > Well, it is about really usable capabilities of isohybrid, Ady wrote: > but their practical combination, usage, effects, > goals... are not expressed clearly enough for the common user to put in > practice. How to express the embarrassing fact that ISOLINUX is not ready for UEFI but isohybrid is ? http://www.syslinux.org/wiki/index.php/Isohybrid#UEFI would

when you say """ Unfortunately, syslinux.efi v.6.03 is not capable of booting optical """, you talk about isolinux.bin ? because my iso image with a "good" alternate eltorito boot image (eg. "uefi ready") is booting with qemu (qemu -cdrom core.iso -bios uefi.fd) and is also booting in hard disk mode (qemu -hda core.iso -bios uefi.fd). Le mercredi

I checked and secure boot is turned off. Jonathan brings it exactly to the point: we have to face UEFI because legacy mode is fading out, if I enable legacy mode I can't even boot anymore through the network (PXE) as these newer network cards can only boot PXE with UEFI. In the mean time I have installed Ubuntu 17.10 with Xen and I was lucky to see that this combination works with UEFI even

> > Hi, > > On 11/11/2014 02:55, Ady wrote: > > Again, dd'ing your isohybrid image onto your (virtual or real) drive > > will fail to boot in EFI mode. Your "syslinux.efi-based" > > "/isolinux/efiboot.img" will not be capable of booting. This is one > > of the steps that corresponds to grub2, not to whichever other EFI > >