[syslinux] Syslinux 6.x EFI PXE

[Adam Sawyer]

It looks like it is more like the issue in bug #26. In the tcpdump I can
see the client attempt to RRQ the kernel but the client itself reports "No
file found." I am having similiar issues as reported in both bug reports
with getting Syslinux 6.02 to work as in syslinux64.efi gets pulled but
then the client gets stuck on ldlinux.e64.

Can I use http/nfs instead after syslinux64.efi gets pulled? Seems to be a
TFTP issue.

Thanks for your help.

Adam


On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Celelibi <celelibi at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2013/12/5, H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com>:
> > On 12/04/2013 02:58 PM, Gene Cumm wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Adam Sawyer <acsawyer at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> All,
> >>>
> >>> I have scoured the mailing list and the web and I can't seem to find
> any
> >>> help on this issue. I am attempting to have EFI machines boot over PXE
> >>> and
> >>> then load various Linux Live distributions. I have a similar setup over
> >>> standard BIOS machines and all is well on that end. First I have tried
> >>> SysLinux 6.0, 6.1, and 6.2 for various EFI enabled machines and thus
> far
> >>> 6.1 gets me to the furthest point.
> >>>
> >>> My clients successfully boot over PXE and grab the relevant files over
> >>> TFTP
> >>> to get me to a simple selection menu. I have watched the interaction in
> >>> the
> >>> TFTP logs and over tcpdump. All is well until I attempt to select a
> >>> kernel
> >>> (Ubuntu 13.10 vmlinuz.efi). Regardless of where the kernel is located,
> >>> nested in a sub-directory of /tftpboot or not, the client always
> >>> responds
> >>> with "File not found." It is odd since all other support files
> >>> (syslinux64.efi, pxelinux.cfg/default, vesamenu.c32, and so forth) have
> >>> no
> >>> issue.
> >>
> >> What exact kernel?  This almost sounds familiar to some errors I've
> >> seen in the last two months.  What do you observe in the packet
> >> capture?
> >>
> >
> > I believe this is exactly the TFTP port number bug.
>
>
> Actually, this is exactly bug #26
> <http://bugzilla.syslinux.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26> the "inode size"
> bug.
> The port number bug has been introduced between 6.02-pre16 and 6.02
> and is only a layer of bug in front of the "inode size" bug.
>
> It would be nice if my patches for bug #26 (inode size) would be
> merged into syslinux. And I think Gene Cumm have a better fix for bug
> #35 (port number).
>
> And why not catch up on the patches and pull requests sent to the
> mailing list? :)
>
> --
> Celelibi
>



-- 
Adam "Arock" Sawyer
301-204-7421
acsawyer at gmail.com