On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 17:03 +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote: Thank you (again?) for all the excellent info you've provided here and in your followups.
> I did not guess too bad with my repacking experiment. > > But this does not explain how the empty FAT partition > got to the end of mini.iso > I see in > > http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/d-i/debian-installer.git/tree/build/config/x86.cfg#n347 > > geniso_hybrid_plus_firmware_partition $(TEMP_MINIISO) > > So obviously the appended partition was not intended for EFI > but for additional firmware. Ah yes, that would seem to make sense. Given that I don't really understand how this additional firmware partition stuff is supposed to fit together (i.e. what impact changing its partition number or adding another VFAT partition etc would have on the code which finds/loads from it) I'm very reluctant to be the one to suggest that we should change things here for Jessie given we've had the beta and are frozen etc. Perhaps we should park this until Stretch? (Kibi, any thoughts on that?) It's not really clear to me who the intended audience of these mini.iso's are: It seems (IMHO only) that mini.iso is mostly useful for d-i developers to dev test the netboot installer images without needing to rebuild the full netinst images (so both legacy and EFI capabilities are useful there). But I think most end users would be better off being directed to the proper netinst images instead, they are more polished and better tested etc (since they share code with the larger ISO images and what have you). At some point it seems like improving mini.iso more for end users would simply be duplicating effort with the CD team. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-cd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1422785352.15317.20.ca...@debian.org
