| Submitter | Richard Purdie |
|---|---|
| Date | April 19, 2012, 10:02 p.m. |
| Message ID | <1334872962.3028.2.camel@ted> |
| Download | mbox | patch |
| Permalink | /patch/26161/ |
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 9a946554e4843841c2ec3cbb2575e80d0ccdc29f |
| Headers | show |
Comments
On 04/19/2012 03:02 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > From: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@intel.com> > > This allows iso images to be written to usb keys and booted on systems which > have a BIOS which support this. There is no real down side to tweaking the iso > images in this way. I like the idea, but there does appear to be one potential downside. From the syslinux isolinux.txt documentation: "The ISO 9660 filesystem is encapsulated in a partition (which starts at offset zero, which may confuse some systems.)" How many different systems and firmware has this been tested on? I think it is a worthwhile patch, but we should be aware of the above in case a regression is reported. In such an event, it seems a NO_ISO_HYBRID flag could be set by the machine.conf to revert to the older behavior. -- Darren > > [YOCTO #1763 partial] > > Signed-off-by: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> > --- > diff --git a/meta/classes/bootimg.bbclass b/meta/classes/bootimg.bbclass > index f4981d8..370b378 100644 > --- a/meta/classes/bootimg.bbclass > +++ b/meta/classes/bootimg.bbclass > @@ -103,6 +103,8 @@ build_iso() { > -r ${ISODIR} > fi > > + isohybrid ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/${IMAGE_NAME}.iso > + > cd ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE} > rm -f ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/${IMAGE_LINK_NAME}.iso > ln -s ${IMAGE_NAME}.iso ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/${IMAGE_LINK_NAME}.iso > > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 12:37, Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com> wrote: > How many different systems and firmware has this been tested on? > > I think it is a worthwhile patch, but we should be aware of the above in > case a regression is reported. In such an event, it seems a > NO_ISO_HYBRID flag could be set by the machine.conf to revert to the > older behavior. and please, do it in 1.3 only.
On Mon, 2012-04-23 at 08:37 -0700, Darren Hart wrote: > > On 04/19/2012 03:02 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > From: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@intel.com> > > > > This allows iso images to be written to usb keys and booted on systems which > > have a BIOS which support this. There is no real down side to tweaking the iso > > images in this way. > > I like the idea, but there does appear to be one potential downside. > From the syslinux isolinux.txt documentation: > > "The ISO 9660 filesystem is encapsulated in a partition (which starts > at offset zero, which may confuse some systems.)" > > How many different systems and firmware has this been tested on? > > I think it is a worthwhile patch, but we should be aware of the above in > case a regression is reported. In such an event, it seems a > NO_ISO_HYBRID flag could be set by the machine.conf to revert to the > older behavior. Agreed, I think we should try this and see if there are any problems reported. I tested a few machines here and it seemed to work on most of them but this was with a USB key, not a CD image. This is probably our more common use case though. Cheers, Richard
Patch
diff --git a/meta/classes/bootimg.bbclass b/meta/classes/bootimg.bbclass index f4981d8..370b378 100644 --- a/meta/classes/bootimg.bbclass +++ b/meta/classes/bootimg.bbclass @@ -103,6 +103,8 @@ build_iso() { -r ${ISODIR} fi + isohybrid ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/${IMAGE_NAME}.iso + cd ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE} rm -f ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/${IMAGE_LINK_NAME}.iso ln -s ${IMAGE_NAME}.iso ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/${IMAGE_LINK_NAME}.iso