Syslinux - Jan 2014 - USB boot problems on Gigabyte GA-M55Plus-S3G

> 
> >This particular mainboard might be using different BIOS values than 
> >others, and there are several other alternative explanations for all 
> >these issues. Your last few tests suggest that we are on a good track 
> >now.
> 
> I have just a couple of questions.  First, who exactly is Mr. Syslinux?
> Who is the primary developer/maintainer?  Second, may I safely assume
> that the goal of what we have all been doing is to produce (at some
> point) a new version of Syslinux that will cater better to older
> motherboards and older Award BIOSes, such as what I have?  Lastly,
> may I also safely assume that at some appropriate point in the future,
> Mr. Syslinux, or some close associate, will actively take steps
> to actively encourage the developers of UBCD, Clonezilla, and OpenELEC
> to incorporate the new "fixed" version of Syslinux into their
future
> distributions, you know, so that other poor sods like me won't in
> future be beset by these issues?  (For my part, *I* have already
> ordered a new/replacement motherboard, so all of this work we've done
> is not likely to benefit me directly.  But I would like to think that
> it hasn't all been wasted effirt, and that _someone_ may benefit.))
> 
 
"Mr. Syslinux" would be H. Peter Anvin (hpa), as the initial 
copyright line shows when booting Syslinux.

Regarding UBCD, Clonezilla (and GParted) Live, I happen to know that 
they are working on improving bootability.

Regarding improving Syslinux, feedback is the way. Other than that, 
it seems to me that in this particular case the issues are more 
related to how the partitioning and formatting (of the USB drive) are 
done. For such cases, we can try to help, but it does not depend on 
The Syslinux Project.

> 
> >I would like to ask from you to _at least try_ my last instructions. 
> 
> I am willing to do so, but with the understanding (on everybody's part)
> that I really don't want to do any more of this, i.e. after this last
> test.  I've tried to be helpful, but there is a limit.  Following
> convoluted sets of technical instructions is not actually my idea of
> a good time.  (And I don't really have any stake or personal interest
> in the outcome anymore either.)
 
I am doing this without any personal gain either.

Regarding the technical instructions, we have been providing 
relatively simple ones. Unfortunately, only you can work on this 
particular system.

We have added technical details so they can be useful to narrow down 
the problem, but IMHO the commands for you were relatively simple.

I can understand that following technical instructions is not fun to 
most people. If you want to stop, nothing we can do about that.

Regarding the hardware, my guess is that you could easily find some 
other mainboards where those USB drives in their current state won't 
be bootable. Some may, some won't.

IMHO, partitioning and formatting the USB drive with an adequate set 
of values is probably a better way to solve this issue, whether for 
this mainboard or for others. This is why I said that you should want 
to be able to do an adequate partitioning and formatting by yourself, 
so then you could put in those USB drives whatever you would want, 
not just some isohybrid images.
> 
> >After dd'ing my test.img to the USB drive, you would have one FAT32
> >partition of about 700MB. So:
> >
> >1_ Expand the content of the Clonezilla Live zip archive in some 
> >temporal directory.
> 
> Ummm... Which version, exactly?
 
You already mentioned having a Clonezilla Live 2.2.1-22 zip archive. 
You could use that one if you want.
> 
> >2_ Move *almost* all the resulting expanded content...
> 
> I should be able to perform all of the moving & replacing of files
> that you requested directly on my FreeBSD system (using ntfs-3g) rather
> than on Windoze.  Do you care, either way?
> 
> 
 
Note that I posted my instructions in a very "generic" way. You can 
use whatever method you want, as long as the USB drive is recognized 
by the OS and the FAT32-LBA filesystem is writable.

If booting it then succeeds, I would also suggest using fdisk just to 
set (write) the "active" flag (nothing else) and test again. I know 
you were not successful with it before, but you were operating under 
some assumptions about the BIOS behavior that were inaccurate 
(according to your own reports), while the partitioning scheme of the 
USB drive was inadequate.

Best Regards,
Ady.

In message <BLU0-SMTP2660F9FD24F490433C41E898BBA0 at phx.gbl>, Ady wrote:
>If booting it then succeeds, I would also suggest using fdisk just to 
>set (write) the "active" flag (nothing else) and test again.
I see no use nor any compelling reason to carry out this particular
test now.

As I/we now know, the only thing that seems to be affected by the status
of the partition bootable flag on a USB stick (with this motherboard &
BIOS) is the presence or absence of the relevant USB device on the
BIOS's Boot Priority list.  But apparently a USB device does not even
have to be visible on that list for the BIOS to make an attempt to boot
from it, as long as the general category of the device is set (in the
BIOS) as either First or Second or Third Boot Device and as long as
there are no attached devices (with media present) which have higher
priority among that set {First,Second,Third}.

In short, setting the "bootable" flag is just a nicety.  In an ideal
world, Clonezilla and UBCD and OpenELEC will eventually provide install
images and/or install instructions that will insure that their respective
bootable partitions _are_ (unlike now) formally flagged as bootable, 
but having that flag set is apparently not a hard & fast requirement
for booting those things, even with this (antiquated?) board & BIOS.


Regards,
rfg

In message <BLU0-SMTP2660F9FD24F490433C41E898BBA0 at phx.gbl>, Ady wrote:
>Regarding UBCD, Clonezilla (and GParted) Live, I happen to know that 
>they are working on improving bootability.
>
>Regarding improving Syslinux, feedback is the way. Other than that, 
>it seems to me that in this particular case the issues are more 
>related to how the partitioning and formatting (of the USB drive) are 
>done.
Doesn't the Syslinux project provide (hopefully strong) specific
reccomendations, to its user base, for how these things should best
be done, you know, in order to insure maximal interoperability?
>For such cases, we can try to help, but it does not depend on 
>The Syslinux Project.
My opinion, worth what you paid for it:  The Syslinux Project should
provide its user base with strong guidance and reccomendations on these
matters, in order to insure maximal interoperability of products
incorporating Syslinux.


Regards,
rfg

On 01/19/2014 03:47 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
> 
> Doesn't the Syslinux project provide (hopefully strong) specific
> reccomendations, to its user base, for how these things should best
> be done, you know, in order to insure maximal interoperability?
> 
We try (see our wiki), but those recommendations can only come from mass
testing across many, many systems -- which we have to rely on our
userbase for as we have no such resources.

	-hpa