[syslinux] USB boot problems on Gigabyte GA-M55Plus-S3G

[Ronald F. Guilmette]

In message <BLU0-SMTP145A44932CB6CC2DB4621568BB30 at phx.gbl>, 
Ady <ady-sf at hotmail.com> wrote:

>Recent (testing) Clonezilla versions include changes related to 
>booting problems, so there are valid reasons to try the very latest 
>version available. At the time I am writing this email, Clonezilla 
>Live 2.2.1-22 is the latest available (at this moment, under 
>(clonezilla_live_testing). This Clonezilla Live version uses Syslinux 
>6.03-pre1.
>...
>Please avoid using any dd' method at this time...
>...
>... Please, at this time use the manual method ...

Alright, I have done exactly as you've asked, and I have meticulously
followed the instructions on the Clonezilla web site for "manual"
install to the letter.

Unfortunately, regardless of whether I perform Step #4 (i.e. running
the "makeboot.bat" script) while logged in as a user with Admin privs,
or under an ordinary user account... the instructions on the web site
neglect to say which is preferred... the first two lines printed by
the script, after hitting an initial key to accept that the process
will apply to the current (USB) drive, the first two lines that are
printed by the "makeboot.bat" script immediately thereafter are
quite entirely disconcerting:

	Accessing physical drive: Access is denied.
	Did not successfully update the MBR; continuing...

The lines printed after the above are entirely perplexing, given the
content of the above messages:

	~~~~~~~~~~ Congratulations ~~~~~~~~~~

	The hidden file ldlinux.sys has been installed
	Your D: drive should now be bootable.
	//NOTE// If your USB flash drive fails to boot (maybe buggy BIOS), try to use "syslinux -sfmar D:".

	Press any key to exit this window!

Obviously, in addition to any/all other problems illustrated by the above
quoted messages, I need to head down now to my local Fry's Electronics
store and purchase a better keyboard.  The one I have doesn't have an
"any" key. :-)

(I assume that that last step suggested by the messages must be REALLY
exciting too!   Elsewise, why would it be followed by an exclamation mark!?!)

But seriously folks, what exactly is up with the messages above?  I do not
wish to be either rude or impertinent, however I do feel compelled to ask:
Under what curcumstances, exactly (and in what Universe, exactly) does it
make sense for a program... i.e. *any* program (or any script)... to issue
what looks, from where I am sitting, like not one but _two_ messages, clearly
saying that the program failed to do its intended job, and then, immediately
after that, extend "Congratulations" to the user, along with other, quite
obviously contradictory messages, indicating the exact opposite, i.e. that
everything has gone entirely according to plan after all?

I have no idea who wrote "makeboot.bat", and I do not wish to offend anyone,
either here or elsewhere, but I do feel compelled to say that my personal
experience with that script so far leads me to the belief that it could
stand some improvement.

In any case, back to the business at hand...

After having meticulously and carefully performed all steps under the
heading "MS Windows Method B: Manual" on the Clonezilla install instruc-
tions page, and after having gotten the messages noted above, I nontheless
shut down Windows 7, removed the Windows 7 drive from the system, and then
powered the system down.  I then powered it up again with only the freshly
minted Clonezilla USB stick installed (into one of the rear USB sockets,
i.e. one which is directly on the motherboard).  The results were as
follows:

	SYSLINUX 6.03 CHS 6.03-pre1 ...

	Failed to load ldlinux.c32
	Boot failed: please change disks and press a key to continue.

Allow me to say that I _do_ understand that with these kinds of boot-time
things there are or may be certain hard limits on the sizes of the
programs implementing the various phases of the bootstrap process, and
that such limits might very well acount for a certain brevity when it
comes to the various error messages that may be produced by the various
programs involved.  I am also cognizant of the fact that I personally
have not earned the right to comment on any of this, due to me not having
invested any of my own sweat into the production of these helpful tools.
Nontheless, I would like to offer the humble suggestion that the message
"Failed to load ldlinux.c32" could perhaps benefit from some additional
elaboration and detail, specifically, either some verbage or, at the
very least, some attached numeric code which might further indicate the
nature and/or cause of the failure.  I cannot imagine how such additional
information would be harmful.

>Please let us know how it goes. Feedback is needed and appreciated.

I have done what I can along these lines for the time being.  But I
do think that I've had enough fun with this stuff for one day.  Perhaps
I'll read over the other messages posted in this thread tomorrow, and
if there are any other helpful tests that I can do I will see if I can
make time to do those tomorrow.

I do feel compelled to say however that the option of just simply getting
a different motherboard is looking more appealing all the time.  I'm not
entirely sure how much more of this fun I will really want to subject
myself to.


Regards,
rfg