Hi,
Raphaël Hertzog wrote:
Note that we disabled a test on the xorriso version in use (in binary_iso)
as we had better results with the old method in use before xorriso gained
knowledge of registering the EFI image as an alternate eltorrito boot
record.
Please give me more details about this
Hi,
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
How was the result from older xorriso better than from
the newer one ?
Which particular version produced better, which version
produced the worse image ?
It's not about a particular version of xorriso, but about the set of
command-line options
Hi,
It's not about a particular version of xorriso, but about the set of
command-line options that we use depending on the xorriso version
No regression then. :)
Were the problems with CD/DVD or with USB sticks ?
In our tests, there are more computers where EFI boot works (from an USB
Hi,
Raphael Hertzog:
EFI boot [...] (from an USB key)
me:
Were the problems with CD/DVD or with USB sticks ?
Please ignore this obsolete question of mine.
Have a nice day :)
Thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe.
Control: tag -1 patch
On Sat, 29 Mar 2014, Daniel Baumann wrote:
On 03/28/2014 11:00 PM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
I worked on EFI boot support for Kali's live+installer image and
this resulted in the attached patch for live-build 3.0.5.
thanks. however, i'm not in favour of merging that for
Hi,
thank you for flying xorriso.
I already asked at debian-cd why the option -isohybrid-apm-hfsplus
is used with a boot image that contains a FAT filesystem.
The option advertises the FAT in an Apple Partition Map as HFS+
partition.
It is rather intended to advertise a HFS+ image for booting
On Mon, 31 Mar 2014, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
It is rather intended to advertise a HFS+ image for booting Macs
according to http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/11285.html .
So my question here too:
Is there any system known which would demand the EFI image to be
presented in an Apple Partition Map as
On 03/28/2014 11:00 PM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
I worked on EFI boot support for Kali's live+installer image and
this resulted in the attached patch for live-build 3.0.5.
thanks. however, i'm not in favour of merging that for following reasons:
* it's against 3.x instead of 4.x
* syslinux
Hello,
I worked on EFI boot support for Kali's live+installer image and
this resulted in the attached patch for live-build 3.0.5.
Some comments:
* The patch can't be used as-is because it assumes that syslinux 6
is packaged like syslinux 4 in wheezy (eg almost everything in
syslinux-common).
9 matches
Mail list logo
