[syslinux] syslinux 6.03 does not boot some kernels

[Ady]

> Am 02.12.2014 schrieb Ady:
> > 
> ( ... )
> > 
> > Since we are in the Syslinux Mailing List, please let me rephrase the 
> > most relevant part of this case: syslinux.efi 6.03 is incapable of 
> > booting some kernel, whereas syslinux.efi 6.01 can successfully boot it 
> > under the same conditions.
> > 
> I can now confirm that this can be replicated on hardware, a
> ThinkCentre M93 will reboot when pushed the 3.2-kernel with syslinux 6.03.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> 	Hardy
> _______________________________________________
> Syslinux mailing list
> Submissions to Syslinux at zytor.com
> Unsubscribe or set options at:
> http://www.zytor.com/mailman/listinfo/syslinux
> 

I really wish one of the (past or present) Syslinux developers would 
reply to this issue.

Last month, a stable standard Slackware kernel could not be booted by 
syslinux.efi. It had to be customized with "CONFIG_RELOCATABLE".

Now a standard Debian Wheezy stable kernel 3.2 is being reported as not 
bootable with Syslinux 6.03, but successfully bootable with Syslinux 
6.01.

IMHO, this should be considered a Syslinux regression.

It sounds as if syslinux.efi 6.03 is only capable of booting a Linux 
kernel 3.3+ with an adequate config with EFISTUB. Considering that some 
relevant changes were introduced to the Linux kernel in its 3.3 branch, 
are these reported behaviors mean that prior kernels (such as the 
current stable Debian Wheezy with kernel 3.2) are not bootable in UEFI 
mode by Syslinux 6.03?

Is Syslinux adding more conditions than really necessary so to boot 
Linux kernels in UEFI mode?

If I understand correctly, a Linux kernel 3.2 might not be able to 
follow newer conventions, considering that such conventions / 
conditions were implemented / refined with kernel 3.3, not before.

Following adequate standards, rules and common conventions is fine, but 
there should be some flexibility (or "fallback") for other cases, such 
as for kernel 3.2 (which is going to be alive in Debian Wheezy for at 
least a couple more years).

So, can someone please clarify this situation?

TIA,
Ady.