On 03.03.2011 00:02, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 02/26/2011 05:34 AM, Michael Brown wrote:
On Saturday 26 Feb 2011 10:08:13 Martin Zwerschke wrote:
I used gpxelinux.0 before, to be able to net boot a mixed environment of
PXE and gPXE -clients from a http-sever.
As far as I understood, breaking an infinite boot-chain could succeed
this way even without a proxy-user-class, cause gpxelinux does not boot
anything else then the kernel or c32 given in it's
"pxelinux.cfg/default" file.
Why don't you create an "ipxelinux.0" ? To me the concept of
"gpxelinux.0" seemed a nice try.
Good idea. I've created a syslinux branch at
http://git.ipxe.org/people/mcb30/syslinux.git/shortlog/refs/heads/ipxelinux
This will build ipxelinux.0. I haven't tested it yet. I suspect it may not
work straight away, since I think there's an outstanding bug regarding the use
of use-cached.
Feel free to give it a try and let us know if it works!
For what it's worth, I intend to merge iPXE into Syslinux as soon as
there is a numbered version. Otherwise bug reports become almost
impossible to deal with.
-hpa
I gave feed back to Michael Brown already, unfortunately it did not CC
to the list.
Reasons for ipxelinux.0 =>
0) booting with PXE-only-netcards (e.g. motherboard-integraded) can
chainload ipxelinux.0 and instantly fetch kernels initrds from HTTP-Server
without having to fork for user-class
1) on Windows-desktop-versions there seems to be no good (free)
DHCP-Server, that offers DHCP-user classes
2) DHC-user-classes are a bit complicated to configure
3) you can boot ipxelinux.0 "over" existing old versions of gPXE or iPXE
in ROMs you don't want to re-program,
so you can use actual iPXE-version
Here my answer to Michael Brown again:
Am 26.02.2011 14:34, schrieb Michael Brown:
On Saturday 26 Feb 2011 10:08:13 Martin Zwerschke wrote:
I used gpxelinux.0 before, to be able to net boot a mixed environment of
PXE and gPXE -clients from a http-sever.
As far as I understood, breaking an infinite boot-chain could succeed
this way even without a proxy-user-class, cause gpxelinux does not boot
anything else then the kernel or c32 given in it's
"pxelinux.cfg/default" file.
Why don't you create an "ipxelinux.0" ? To me the concept of
"gpxelinux.0" seemed a nice try.
Good idea. I've created a syslinux branch at
http://git.ipxe.org/people/mcb30/syslinux.git/shortlog/refs/heads/ipxelinux
This will build ipxelinux.0. I haven't tested it yet. I suspect it
may not
work straight away, since I think there's an outstanding bug regarding
the use
of use-cached.
Feel free to give it a try and let us know if it works!
Michael
Wow, you are REALLY fast!
I gave it a try (as I'm no linux-man it was a bit of a skill for me).
2 build-errors occured (something 'bout "undionly.kkpxe").
Tried it with "make -i" so it went through in spite of this and created
a "ipxelinux.0" after all.
With this one i managed to boot Thinstation 2.2.2gRC in a virtualbox
(this has got a pure PXE emulation).
It
- pulled "ipxelinux.0" from my tftpd (Jounin) and -as configured in
my "pxelinux.cfg"
- chainloaded vmlinuz and initrd from my IIS-webserver
- successfully started Thinstation.
To my impression, http-transfer goes slower than it should - and if i
try to chainload vmlinuz/initrd from the TFTP-Server, it gets stuck
loading vmlinuz.
I believe you are right with this pending "use-cached"-bug.
But all in all it gets really promising!
btw.: Thinstation creates a "vesamenu.c32" module, that can be run with
"pxelinux.0" but not with "gpxelinux.0" or as well with "ipxelinux.0".
Do you know the reason for that behaviour?
Thanks a lot and so long,
Martin
_______________________________________________
ipxe-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ipxe.org/mailman/listinfo/ipxe-devel
