similar to: isohybrid boot from logical partition

Hi, Duncan Elliot wrote: > As far as I can see, this essentially trims off the first 3 bytes of the > custom isohybrid MBR image before applying it to the ISO. You probably mean this line: memcpy(mbr, &isohdpfx[hd0 + 3 * partok], MBRSIZE); The indize do not apply to bytes but to byte arrays of size MBRSIZE. extern unsigned char isohdpfx[][MBRSIZE]; (hd0 + 3 * partok)

Thanks for the clarification Thomas. Thomas Schmitt wrote: > (Did you already tell which partitions exist and in which one do you want > to put your ISO ?) I've tried a number of different structures, but the results are consistent (boots fine from primary partitions, not from logical partitions). For example for a disk partitioned like below: Disk /dev/sdc: 3.8 GiB, 4007657472

Hi, following will be 6 patch proposals for isohybrid.c 1: Encode GPT partition names as UTF-16LE 2: Correct blocking factor in APM partition block counts 3: Correct end block address of first GPT partition 4: Write GPT backup to the very end of the image 5: Change all fseek(3) to fseeko(3) 6: Introduce option --mbr and make isohybrid.c compilable standalone If the form needs adjustments,

I've attempted to understand what the isohybrid tool is doing, specifically with the "--partok" flag. As far as I can see, this essentially trims off the first 3 bytes of the custom isohybrid MBR image before applying it to the ISO. Can anyone explain how this enables the ISO to "be happy" on a partition, rather than whole disk? And does anyone have suggestions for what

Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Since we know that the isolinux.bin binary is well ok on other partitions, > i'd say that the MBR code does not load the right blocks from disk when > it wants to get isolinux.bin. Yes, these are my thoughts as well. I think the jump from GRUB to the isohybrid code on the logical partition is working fine, but when the isohybrid code is trying to jump to

Op 2014-06-23 om 20:09 schreef syslinux-bot for H. Peter Anvin: > Commit-ID: f9dad5340bcefe34d860e991e8743be01a4d6c3c > Gitweb: http://www.syslinux.org/commit/f9dad5340bcefe34d860e991e8743be01a4d6c3c > Author: H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> > AuthorDate: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 20:06:51 -0700 > Committer: H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> > CommitDate: Mon, 23

Hi, i am trying to document the MBR selection by isohybrid option --partok. I assume it is related to "altmbr.bin" as described in http://www.syslinux.org/wiki/index.php/Mbr But there i read "altmbr.bin [...] boots from a partition with fixed number, see below." The "see below" probably refers to "The altmbr.bin (all 3 variants) is only 439 bytes long, -- one

EFI systems typically don't support booting off ISO 9660 filesystems, even if written to USB sticks. This patch adds support for generating a GPT that covers the stick as well, with an additional partition entry pointing purely at the secondary El Torito image. When burned to CD the secondary El Torito will be used as an EFI boot image, and when written to a USB stick the GPT partition

Hi, H. Peter Anvin: > It means that the .iso can be booted from a partition using any of the > standard MBRs (not necessarily altmbr), But the --partok MBRs (isohdpp*) stem from altmbr ? If so: don't they need the partition number patched in ? (If not: i have to rethink the link to article "Mbr" at http://www.syslinux.org/wiki/index.php/Isohybrid#MBR_selection ) >

Op 2014-06-20 om 15:56 schreef Ady: > > The Perl variant, isohybrid.in, seems to be getting left behind > regarding several patches. I don't recall whether there is at least > some mention in the isohybrid docs about the existence of 2 variants > included in Syslinux (and that is in addition to other isohybrid > methods outside Syslinux). Is there any reference? >

Hi, On 23/06/2014 12:07, Thomas Schmitt wrote:> Hi, > > i have written an introduction to isohybrid and put it on > the discussion page of the ISOLINUX wiki. > > http://www.syslinux.org/wiki/index.php/Talk:ISOLINUX#Proposal_for_description_of_isohybrid > > Review and proposals are appreciated. Caveat emptor: this is a review by an end user (not a developer), who

greetings. centos 6.7 [current] 'disk utility' has started showing message; WARNING: The partition is misaligned by 2560 bytes. This may result in very poor performance. Repartitioning is suggested. for sdc5 - /home partition. /dev/sdc5 302243312 156348604 130534968 55% /home /dev/sdc7 80854912 57088 76683952 1% /hdd/c/07 other than time involved to backup

Hi, i think i found the reason for the boot failure in the definition of Extended Boot Records. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_boot_record#Values "Starting sector = relative offset between this EBR sector and the first sector of the logical partition. Note: This is often the same value for each EBR on the same hard disk; usually 63 for Windows XP or older." So if

Various EFI systems insist that there be no active flag in the pMBR in order to parse the GPT. The only way around this is to also generate a valid MBR - the firmware will then pick that up and use the system partition provided there. In order to deal with other EFI "sanity" checks, the partition type for the non-EFI partitions is set to 0 to skip the firmware bailing because of

Thanks for all the input everyone. I can understand the problem more clearly now. Didier Spaier wrote: > Sorry if this is a silly question: why not use a GUID partition > table instead of using logical partitions? Not a silly question, I had the same idea and had tried it out but it didn't work (same error msg). Ady Ady wrote: > The typical (modern) "MBR" supports 4

My previous question: "can syslinux on a USBstik also boot installations on other USB devices ?" got no proper reply, so I'm now including more background detail. The new problem is that my 32bit partition of ETHOberon, only gives a proper font-size under Debian7:DVDinstaller:rescueMode, since I'm forced to use a laptop, after my previous systems were stolen. Neither gnome nor

I have a system running CentOS 6.3, with a SCSI attached RAID: http://www.raidweb.com/index.php/2012-10-24-12-40-09/janus-ii-scsi/2012-10-24-12-40-59.html For disaster recovery purposes, I want to build up a spare system which could take the place of the server hosting the RAID above. But here's what I see: # fdisk -l /dev/sdc WARNING: GPT (GUID Partition Table) detected on

> Hi, > > Ady: > > _ Wiki should use more user-friendly language and "less deep" > > technical information. > > I tried to stay at the surface of isohybrid. > (Didier already asked for more depth about expert options.) My interpretation of Didier's questions is less depth and more user-friendly practical commands for end-users. Our points of view

> 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

> > 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