[syslinux] [RFC] make extlinux work without mount the filesystem
Ady
ady-sf at hotmail.com
Thu Nov 20 23:17:49 PST 2014
>
>
> On 11/21/2014 02:33 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > On 11/20/2014 10:21 PM, Robert Yang wrote:
> >>
> >> which can copy files into test.img without mount it, for example:
> >> $ mke2fs -t ext3 -d <rootfs_dir> -F test.img
> >>
> >> I'd like to make extlinux can work without mount the filesystem (use
> >> libext2fs), is it possible for extlinux, please ? And is such a patch
> >> acceptable, please ? (Add a "-d/--device <device>" option, and the
> >> option is optional).
> >>
> >
> > I would definitely accept such a patch. It probably makes more sense in the
> > "syslinux" installer rather than "extlinux", since the former already operates
> > on an unmounted filesystem.
>
> Great, thanks for the reply, I will do more investigations on syslinux/extlinux,
> and ask for help or send a draft design later.
>
> // Robert
>
> >
> > I would also love to unify the FAT implementation.
> >
> > -hpa
> >
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Syslinux mailing list
> Submissions to Syslinux at zytor.com
> Unsubscribe or set options at:
> http://www.zytor.com/mailman/listinfo/syslinux
>
Let's not forget that:
_ The 'extlinux' command already accepts a "--device <dev>" parameter.
_ There are several "syslinux installers" (for BIOS) and there should
be a certain degree of convergence / consistency between them,
specially regarding the command line arguments (aka. "usage"). This
convergence should include the Windows-based and DOS-based installers
as much as possible. Conflicting arguments between the different
SYSLINUX installers, or breaking backwards compatibility (in terms of
users' usage, or even regarding procedures and documentation) should be
minimized as much as possible.
_ Under Linux, we have the (./bios/linux/) 'syslinux-nomtools'
installer, the (./bios/mtools/) 'syslinux' installer, and the
(./bios/extlinux/) 'extlinux' installer. They have different
requirements, different dependencies, and different capabilities, so
one installer might be more adequate for a certain situation / use-case
than others.
_ The Windows-based and DOS-based SYSLINUX installers currently do not
support all the options / capabilities of the Linux-based installers
(mostly because no one invested time on fully implementing them), but
they also include capabilities that are not included in the Linux-based
installers.
_ Whichever additional / proposed / new arguments to be added to any
one of the SYSLINUX installers, they shall not conflict with arguments
already included in anyone of the installers (e.g. "-a", "-m"...).
_ Let's be careful not to allow a "too-easy" execution of code that
could be potentially harmful. The SYSLINUX installers are frequently
used by common users with no knowledge nor understanding. If a SYSLINUX
installer could potentially be used "too-freely" and without special
requirements / permissions / care, then relevant warnings (and perhaps
even more than that) should be available to the user before a
potentially harmful action is actually applied.
Regards,
Ady.
More information about the Syslinux
mailing list