Re: [gPXE] [PATCH] Make gpxe report syslinux version 2.12
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 07:37:09PM -0400, Gene Cumm wrote: On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 16:29, Casey Dahlin cdah...@redhat.com wrote: Some versions of mboot.c32 shipped by VMWare fail because of a version check (done with INT 22h with AX set to 0001h). gPXE appears to use an empty version number (0.0). This patch makes it return 2.12 Which VMware product(s)/version(s) (ESXi, perhaps?) with what version of mboot.c32? Yes, ESXi, I'll have to relay the version question (John, if you're reading, feel free to chime in). Have you considered using gpxelinux.0 (at gpxe/gpxelinux.0) and any needed modules (like com32/modules/mboot.c32) from the current Syslinux package? gpxelinux.0 in Syslinux 4.02 is at gPXE 1.0.0. Again, I'll have to forward that. Why version 2.12? Is that the exact minimum version your mboot.c32 wants? As I understand, yes. --CJD ___ gPXE mailing list gPXE@etherboot.org http://etherboot.org/mailman/listinfo/gpxe
Re: [gPXE] [PATCH] Make gpxe report syslinux version 2.12
Hi Gene, On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 13:00 -0400, Casey Dahlin wrote: On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 07:37:09PM -0400, Gene Cumm wrote: On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 16:29, Casey Dahlin cdah...@redhat.com wrote: Some versions of mboot.c32 shipped by VMWare fail because of a version check (done with INT 22h with AX set to 0001h). gPXE appears to use an empty version number (0.0). This patch makes it return 2.12 Which VMware product(s)/version(s) (ESXi, perhaps?) with what version of mboot.c32? VMware ESXi 4.0.1...not sure what version of mboot.c32 actually. Yes, ESXi, I'll have to relay the version question (John, if you're reading, feel free to chime in). Have you considered using gpxelinux.0 (at gpxe/gpxelinux.0) and any needed modules (like com32/modules/mboot.c32) from the current Syslinux package? gpxelinux.0 in Syslinux 4.02 is at gPXE 1.0.0. Hmm, does that version include a fix for this ? Not sure what this suggestion is meant to test. Either way, the installer is looking for any version. It doesn't have to be 2.12. Can that field be populated automatically by a macro ? Why version 2.12? Is that the exact minimum version your mboot.c32 wants? Yes, correct...exact minimum...as I mentioned, anything higher would work just fine as well --jer ___ gPXE mailing list gPXE@etherboot.org http://etherboot.org/mailman/listinfo/gpxe
Re: [gPXE] [PATCH] Make gpxe report syslinux version 2.12
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 13:05, Jeremy Eder je...@redhat.com wrote: Hi Gene, On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 13:00 -0400, Casey Dahlin wrote: On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 07:37:09PM -0400, Gene Cumm wrote: On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 16:29, Casey Dahlin cdah...@redhat.com wrote: Some versions of mboot.c32 shipped by VMWare fail because of a version check (done with INT 22h with AX set to 0001h). gPXE appears to use an empty version number (0.0). This patch makes it return 2.12 Which VMware product(s)/version(s) (ESXi, perhaps?) with what version of mboot.c32? VMware ESXi 4.0.1...not sure what version of mboot.c32 actually. Probably the same as the VMware build of mboot.c32 from the ESXi Installable CD, I'd guess. Yes, ESXi, I'll have to relay the version question (John, if you're reading, feel free to chime in). Have you considered using gpxelinux.0 (at gpxe/gpxelinux.0) and any needed modules (like com32/modules/mboot.c32) from the current Syslinux package? gpxelinux.0 in Syslinux 4.02 is at gPXE 1.0.0. Hmm, does that version include a fix for this ? Not sure what this suggestion is meant to test. Yes and no. If you use gpxelinux.0, mboot.c32 will be talking with PXELINUX and not the emulated API in gPXE. However, if you are not using gPXE on top of the hardware's PXE client and using it instead of any hardware-derived client, this would need a little more work (roughly gPXE to load gpxelinux.0 to run mboot.c32). Either way, the installer is looking for any version. It doesn't have to be 2.12. Can that field be populated automatically by a macro ? Why version 2.12? Is that the exact minimum version your mboot.c32 wants? Yes, correct...exact minimum...as I mentioned, anything higher would work just fine as well I would think that it should match the API implemented in gPXE or be zero. I'm not sure if HPA is on this list or not and what his opinion/preference is. As of Syslinux-4.00, there was a big change in the API and COM32 format. -- -Gene ___ gPXE mailing list gPXE@etherboot.org http://etherboot.org/mailman/listinfo/gpxe
