[syslinux] Inconsistencies between ExtLinux and IsoLinux

[Thomas Schmitt]

Hi,

Stefan Bucur wrote:
> contains the "-R" paramter, which enables Rock Ridge information to be
> included in the ISO. However, according to the ISOLINUX documentation
> [1], it "only uses the plain ISO 9660 filenames, i.e. it does not
> support Rock Ridge or Joliet filenames.". Therefore, the ISO image you
> built may not work as expected with ISOLINUX (maybe it does not hang
> from the beginning, but you can expect strange behavior, from time to
> time, as it just happened).

This theory would mean trouble for my own
project which produces ISO 9660 with Rock Ridge
unconditionally.
I doubt it for now, because:

- Rock Ridge images with ISOLINUX booted in my
  tests from CD, DVD and USB sticks (the latter
  only if the BIOS is willing to boot that way
  in general).

- Rock Ridge entries reside in the ISO directory
  records as a kind of trailing garbage.
  First come the ISO 9660 data, then in the
  System Use Are come entries under the SUSP
  protocol which also governs Rock Ridge.
  It is hard to imagine why a ISO-only reader
  should not just ignore the extra data.

In this light, a problem with Rock Ridge would
rather mean that the booting system _needs_
the Rock Ridge features but does not get them
from the filesystem service.
So omitting -R would not help. Changing the
original setup on hard disk, so it only contains
and needs 8.3 names, would be the thing to do.


Matthijs ter Woord wrote:
>  mkisofs -R ... -hard-disk-boot ...

Can it be the option -hard-disk-boot which makes
the difference ? At least it seemed not be needed
with Stefan's test:
> mkisofs -o ../Boot.iso -b isolinux.bin -c isolinux.cat -no-emul-boot
> -boot-load-size 4 -boot-info-table .


I have to admit that i know only the ISO/RR
side of the topic of this thread.
So i have few idea what goes on after the BIOS
hopped from El Torito to ISOLINUX.
About mkisofs -hard-disk-boot i know just what is
written in the man page.

If it really turns out that it works without -R
in the same environment where it fails with -R,
then i would appreciate clear confirmation of that
particular fact.


Have a nice day :)

Thomas