[syslinux] [PATCH 0/2] Do not use the "red zone" on EFI

[Ady]

> On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 8:58 PM, Ady via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote:
> 
> > I'm not sure I understand what you are saying.
> 
> I don't think you understand the current build system.  How many times
> have you built Syslinux from just source?
> 
 
 
I don't use git, so I have always downloaded a tarball, expanded it and 
built from the resulting root directory when needed. For the most part, 
I have used 'make installer' only, but not always. OTOH, I am not a 
package maintainer, I don't use additional building scripts (nor 
equivalent unattended methods), I am not building for others, and I am 
not cross-compiling.
 
> > Why exactly the following quote from the referenced commit is not
> > relevant / adequate for "doc/building.txt" and/or for the corresponding
> > wiki page?
> 
> Incorrect use.
> 
> > [quote]
> > On a x86_64 platform, the following cross-builds syslinux for i386
> >  To build for i386: make EFI_BUILD=1 ARCH=i386
> >
> > On a x86_64 platform, the following builds syslinux for x86_64
> >  To build natively: make EFI_BUILD=1
> > [/quote]
> >
> > Aren't 'ARCH' and 'EFI_BUILD' still there? Aren't they valid /
> > relevant?
> 
> Yes and Yes
> 
> > Would that usage of "make" fail?
> 
> I'd be completely surprised if a working object ever comes out of that
> unless aligned.
> 
> > Does the 'make "firmware"' usage contradict / supersede / cancel in any
> > way the 'ARCH' and/or 'EFI_BUILD' options? Can't all these commands /
> > options live together?
> 
> The firmwares FORCIBLY set these.  See 1408e6ca
> 
 
 
The text in that commit doesn't really answer the questions *to me*, 
and it also includes some inaccurate phrases. That commit also 
introduced the ".bios/" sub-directory, which is, still today, a source 
of confusion and additional problems for many.

Anyway, I'll be glad to see known issues resolved sooner rather than 
later; unfortunately there seem to be too many of them.
 
> > If the suggested patch were to be merged, would such usage of "make" be
> > affected?
> >
> > A question for Peter: how is 'make' executed, regarding the above
> > options, so to build the current official versions of Syslinux?
> 
> To my knowledge, "make" with some special sauce that just marks the
> binary with proper versioning.
> 
> > I would like to extend such questions to package maintainers, but I
> > doubt anyone would answer.
> 
> -- 
> -Gene
 
 
Thank you for the replies. I do appreciate it.

Regards,
Ady.
 
> _______________________________________________
> Syslinux mailing list
> Submissions to Syslinux at zytor.com
> Unsubscribe or set options at:
> http://www.zytor.com/mailman/listinfo/syslinux
>