2013/8/7 Jonas Keidel <jonas at jonas-keidel.de>> > > 2013/8/6 H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> > >> On 08/05/2013 11:29 PM, Jonas Keidel wrote: >> > 2013/8/6 H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> >> > >> >> What about "chain.c32 hd1" or "chain.c32 hd1 swap"? >> >> >> > >> > That's right, but due to our pxe environment we need a static entry >> which >> > handles both, booting from first and second hdd if one fails. localboot >> > does so. >> > >> >> Actually this does highlight an issue with chain.c32... there really >> should be support for "try this, check X, then that". >> > > Can that be implemented? Because i think that is a must-have feature of > chain.c32 to test if there is a bootable sector on first hdd --> boot from > that. > If not it should try to look for a bootable sector on the second hdd and > try that. > if both don't work it should abort. At current state it always aborts if > the given hdd (hd0 or hd1) is not bootable. > >So what about this topic? Do you think it can be implemented?> >> -hpa >> >> >> >
I like to reactivate this topic because i don't see any changes at the last time... So what about the topic? 2013/8/9 Jonas Keidel <jonas at jonas-keidel.de>> 2013/8/7 Jonas Keidel <jonas at jonas-keidel.de> > >> >> >> 2013/8/6 H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> >> >>> On 08/05/2013 11:29 PM, Jonas Keidel wrote: >>> > 2013/8/6 H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> >>> > >>> >> What about "chain.c32 hd1" or "chain.c32 hd1 swap"? >>> >> >>> > >>> > That's right, but due to our pxe environment we need a static entry >>> which >>> > handles both, booting from first and second hdd if one fails. localboot >>> > does so. >>> > >>> >>> Actually this does highlight an issue with chain.c32... there really >>> should be support for "try this, check X, then that". >>> >> >> Can that be implemented? Because i think that is a must-have feature of >> chain.c32 to test if there is a bootable sector on first hdd --> boot from >> that. >> If not it should try to look for a bootable sector on the second hdd and >> try that. >> if both don't work it should abort. At current state it always aborts if >> the given hdd (hd0 or hd1) is not bootable. >> >> > > So what about this topic? Do you think it can be implemented? > > >> >>> -hpa >>> >>> >>> >> >
H. Peter Anvin
2013-Aug-22 11:57 UTC
[syslinux] Intel DX79TO localboot problem with CentOS
Code doesn't just write itself... Jonas Keidel <jonas at jonas-keidel.de> wrote:>I like to reactivate this topic because i don't see any changes at the >last >time... >So what about the topic? > > >2013/8/9 Jonas Keidel <jonas at jonas-keidel.de> > >> 2013/8/7 Jonas Keidel <jonas at jonas-keidel.de> >> >>> >>> >>> 2013/8/6 H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> >>> >>>> On 08/05/2013 11:29 PM, Jonas Keidel wrote: >>>> > 2013/8/6 H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> >>>> > >>>> >> What about "chain.c32 hd1" or "chain.c32 hd1 swap"? >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> > That's right, but due to our pxe environment we need a static >entry >>>> which >>>> > handles both, booting from first and second hdd if one fails. >localboot >>>> > does so. >>>> > >>>> >>>> Actually this does highlight an issue with chain.c32... there >really >>>> should be support for "try this, check X, then that". >>>> >>> >>> Can that be implemented? Because i think that is a must-have feature >of >>> chain.c32 to test if there is a bootable sector on first hdd --> >boot from >>> that. >>> If not it should try to look for a bootable sector on the second hdd >and >>> try that. >>> if both don't work it should abort. At current state it always >aborts if >>> the given hdd (hd0 or hd1) is not bootable. >>> >>> >> >> So what about this topic? Do you think it can be implemented? >> >> >>> >>>> -hpa >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>-- Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse brevity and lack of formatting.