Am 26. Juli 2025 18:30:54 MESZ schrieb Mark Kettenis <mark.kette...@xs4all.nl>: >> 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.
First match in Google: A WIC file is a raster image saved in the Java Wavelet Image Codec (JWIC) format. <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_file_formats> does not list .wic at all. It seems that .wic is not a usual ending for raw disk images while .img is well known. Best regards Heinrich > >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)] >>
