Syslinux - Jan 2014 - Advice/directions to users of Syslinux

Hi,

me:
> > But MiB alignment does not match 255x63 cylinders. (Or at least
> > only in very large steps. They share no prime factors except
> > the block size.)
 
Ady:
> It doesn't matter. My test.img for Ronald had Nx255x63 geometry, and 
> STARTing LBA of 2048.
Yeah. It has end CHS 89,69,35.
But it lacks the other ingredient of the mess: a CHS driven filesystem.

The hope with 64x32 and 255x63 is to make CHS addressing
more likely to happen correctly.

> So, IMHO, I don't see a Windows-user looking for mkdiskimage, but I 
> could be wrong.
If the MS-Windows tools guide the user properly, then there
will be no need for mkdiskimage.

But a DOS line with mkdiskimage is by far easier to document
than a GUI session. Further it would follow the tradition
of syslinux.exe examples in the main wiki.

> And, not every fail in SYSLINUX is related to inadequate 
> partitioning.
I will graft this statement into Bad_Heritage_on_MS_DOS_disk.

> I would suggest not using the work "disk". It is frequently 
> misinterpreted, specially when used near "MS-DOS". We are talking
> about "partition tables".
I am unhappy with "disk" too.
But that change would have a much wider scope in the text.

"Disk" is the term used by the starting point of the partitioning
endeavor in SYSLINUX#Creating_a_Bootable_Disk
 "In order to create a bootable disk using SYSLINUX,
  prepare a normal MS-DOS formatted disk."

> It works on GPT too.
This is hopefully a feature, not a problem. :o)

> Don't worry. The wiki is there to be improved.
My change shall already start as improvement.


Have a nice day :)

Thomas

> Hi,
> 
> me:
> > > But MiB alignment does not match 255x63 cylinders. (Or at least
> > > only in very large steps. They share no prime factors except
> > > the block size.)
>  
> Ady:
> > It doesn't matter. My test.img for Ronald had Nx255x63 geometry,
and
> > STARTing LBA of 2048.
> 
> Yeah. It has end CHS 89,69,35.
> But it lacks the other ingredient of the mess: a CHS driven filesystem.
> 
> The hope with 64x32 and 255x63 is to make CHS addressing
> more likely to happen correctly.
 
Once the partition table matches the actual partition location, and 
the values in the VBR match them too (we are getting to that point 
when we finish with the "simple correction" procedure I already 
described), there is no issue about CHS addresses anymore.

But that's OK. Those are just two different geometries (and I am more 
inclined to use Nx255x63 for reasons I already mentioned). Presenting 
2 possible geometries would be fine. Presenting the whole START / END 
values, per sizes, and whatnot... that's the part, I think, is "too 
much" detail to be effective; the common user would go away.
> 
> > I would suggest not using the work "disk". It is frequently 
> > misinterpreted, specially when used near "MS-DOS". We are
talking
> > about "partition tables".
> 
> I am unhappy with "disk" too.
> But that change would have a much wider scope in the text.
> 
> "Disk" is the term used by the starting point of the partitioning
> endeavor in SYSLINUX#Creating_a_Bootable_Disk
>  "In order to create a bootable disk using SYSLINUX,
>   prepare a normal MS-DOS formatted disk."
> 
 
You can still use a different wording in a linked section. If "disk" 
is not the best choice for the new section, then choose a better 
term.
> 
> > It works on GPT too.
> 
> This is hopefully a feature, not a problem. :o)
 
Yes, my point is that a casual user might (mis)interpret (from 
certain paragraphs) that Syslinux is for MBR only. In fact, the "can 
Syslinux work on GPT?" question has been posted more than once. So, 
let's try to minimize that wrong impression when editing the Syslinux 
wiki.

Regards,
Ady.

Hi,

Ady:
> > > I would suggest not using the work "disk".
me:
> > I am unhappy with "disk" too.
> > But that change would have a much wider scope in the text.
Ady:
> You can still use a different wording in a linked section. If
"disk"
> is not the best choice for the new section, then choose a better 
> term.
Two problems:

There are probably reasons why "disk" was chosen as term for
the wiki. I am reluctant to overthrow this choice without
backing from SYSLINUX developers.

What term to use instead of "disk" ?
"Drive" might be more modern, but an USB stick is not actually
a drive. "Device" is probably a unixism and also anbigous,
because partitions are devices, too.

Finding a new term and getting agreement is worth a separate
wiki overhaul project.

> > > It [SYSLINUX] works on GPT too.
> > This is hopefully a feature, not a problem. :o)
> Yes, my point is that a casual user might (mis)interpret (from 
> certain paragraphs) that Syslinux is for MBR only.
This is an interesting wiki enhancement project, too.
Starting at the statement on the main wiki:
"prepare a normal MS-DOS formatted disk".

First one would have to collect tangible information.
(I know GPT as i know MBR: on byte level only.)


Have a nice day :)

Thomas

In message <32488642060905516076 at scdbackup.webframe.org>, 
"Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup at gmx.net> wrote:
>I am unhappy with "disk" too.
>But that change would have a much wider scope in the text.
s/disk/mass storage device/g
>"Disk" is the term used by the starting point of the partitioning
>endeavor in SYSLINUX#Creating_a_Bootable_Disk
> "In order to create a bootable disk using SYSLINUX,
>  prepare a normal MS-DOS formatted disk."
Times change.  Terminology must be adjusted to keep up.


Regards,
rfg

Hi,

me:
> > What term to use instead of "disk" ?
Ronald F. Guilmette wrote in a different thread were my mispost
lured him:
> "mass storage device"
>
> It is the only term which encompasses everything that is of interest
> here, including not just rotating magnetic media, but also flash...
> both USB and sATA... and also rotating *optical* media,  rewritable
> or otherwise.
The rotating optical media (CD, DVD, BD) are not "disks"
suitable for SYSLINUX or EXTLINUX, but rather need ISOLINUX.
PC-BIOS boots them via El Torito boot records, not via MBR.
(That's why the ISO 9660 images with MBR are called "hybrids".)

On the other hand "disk" shall include regular files (disk images).
mkdiskimage seems to be originally intended more for image files
than for real devices. Its help text says "file" not "disk".
Virtual machines will accept image files as emulated disks.

Further, the term is too voluminous, given the fact that "disk"
occurs dozens of times in the wiki.


Currently my best idea for this problem is to have an
article in the wiki, that explains what "disk" shall mean.
Then we could link to it the first occurence of "disk"
in each of the other articles.


But first, i need to complete my article about "normal
MS-DOS disks".
 
http://www.syslinux.org/wiki/index.php/User:Scdbackup#New_Common_Problems_Bad_Heritage_on_MS_DOS_disk

To my own perception it is now only missing some mkdiskimage
example for "NT/2K/XP" resp. "DOS", matching the
installation
instructions in
  http://www.syslinux.org/wiki/index.php/SYSLINUX#Creating_a_Bootable_Disk


Did anybody on this list ever run mkdiskimage on a real
storage device attached to a Microsoft system ?

I guess from
  syslinux.exe --mbr --active --directory /boot/syslinux/ --install z:
that possibly
  mkdiskimage -F z: 0 255 63
is worth a try.
But i am really not educated with Microsoft device models.

If no examples pop up, then i will cover Microsoft systems by
a mkdiskimage run on an image file and the prescription to
copy it onto stick with their "favorite disk copy program".
Whatever that could be ...


Have a nice day :)

Thomas