[syslinux] Acceptable version mismatch between syslinux 6.0N's MBR/ldlinux.sys and *.c32?

[Ady]

> Hi,
> 
> first, thanks a lot, Ady and Gene, for your prompt and very
> useful replies!
> 
> Ady wrote (11 Jun 2014 20:18:43 GMT) :
> > Although I haven't tested it lately, the Tuxboot tool should be able 
> > to use the version of Syslinux included in your ISO images so to 
> > transfer it to a (USB) drive. Since it works for other Debian-based 
> > distros, it might answer to your needs. GParted/Clonezilla Live also 
> > include scripts for the same purpose, and they are already using 
> > Syslinux 6.03-pre*.
> 
> Ah, that was just the hint I needed. I didn't know that all what we
> needed, in our situation, was the syslinux binary. Now, I see that
> Clonezilla simply ships a syslinux binary (in utils/linux/syslinux),
> and Tuxboot uses this path. We'll do the same, and will use the same
> paths for standardization's sake.
 
If I may, I'd like to clarify the above paragraph, just in case some 
potential reader might misunderstand / misinterpret it.

First, the 'util/linux/syslinux' path is not really a requirement. It 
just happens that ClonezillaLive, GPartedLive and Tuxboot (among 
others) have developer(s) in-common. Considering that the Syslinux 
installers (for BIOS systems) use different file names and that the 
Syslinux version shall be the same for all Syslinux-related files, 
they could all be located in one directory all together, including 
the (BIOS) c32 files, the MBR variants... Of course the EFI variants 
shall be located in a different directory, specially the c32 modules 
for EFI.

Regarding to "all" what is needed, it is not just the binary 
installer. All Syslinux-related files included in the aforementioned 
ISO images are originated from the same exact version of Syslinux.

If a user would execute the scripts while the c32 files are from a 
different version than the installer, then the result would possibly 
have some inconsistency. In a (USB) drive, you might be able to boot 
but only if no other c32 module is used. Mixing versions is just a 
call for unexpected behavior, and using "scattered" paths elevates 
that probability.

So, although you could include in the ISO images the same "scattered" 
paths as GParted/Clonezilla Live, using one (and only one) directory 
for all Syslinux-related files for BIOS (and another, adequate path 
for EFI) would be a valid approach too. It depends on how much 
trouble is for you to maintain your scripts and on how easy the users 
can update under different circumstances (e.g. using a different 
distro with a different version of Syslinux so to update TAILS on an 
external drive, which might also include multiple distributions...).

Regards,
Ady.