> Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2025 09:45:16 -0600 > From: Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2025 at 07:56:39PM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > > Am 25. Juli 2025 19:35:33 MESZ schrieb Javier Tia <javier....@linaro.org>: > > >Together with current '.iso' and '.img', the try_load_from_uri_path > > >function now allows files with the '.wic' extension as viable bootable > > >images. > > > > Why wouldn't you simply name your files *.img? > > The answer has been lost to time at this point, since output has been > ".wic" for over a decade now.
Note that other EFI implementations don't support '.wic' either. WHich is why we switched the OpenBSD installer disk images from '.fs' to '.img' some years ago specifically to support EFI HTTP boot. > > Shouldn't we get away from the DOS age routine of relying on > > filename extensions? > > > > Just check if the fileheader is a PE header or if it is a known > > partitoning scheme. > > Looking in to a cleaner more general solution is worthwhile, I agree. > > -- > Tom > > [2:application/pgp-signature Show Save:signature.asc (228B)] >
