[syslinux] Patches from Debian

Ady Ady ady-sf at hotmail.com
Mon Oct 23 17:58:46 PDT 2017

> Hi,
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 17:19:43 +0000
> Ady Ady via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote:
> > When you say "new syslinux version from git", do you mean the git
> > head in anonscm.debian.org/git... (Debian's source code for
> > Syslinux-related packages), or rather the upstream Syslinux git head
> > (in repo.or.cz... or in git.zytor.com...)?
> Sorry for the confusion: I mean the syslinux git head from
> git.zytor.com.
> > Either way, your test's results would suggest that the problem might
> > be avoided when/if:
> > 
> > _ updating the gnu-efi submodule in Syslinux;
> It fails in the `make bios` part, which does not use gnu-efi at all.
> > _ changing the sort (order) within Makefiles so as to make the build 
> > more reproducible.
> Both test builds had Debian's patches applied, so that's not it either.
Let's not forget that other similar changes to Makefiles were performed 
upstream after 6.03, so part of the changes that are now performed in 
Debian's Syslinux 6.03 are already in the upstream git head.
> > If I'm not mistaken, these 2 are the relevant differences between the 
> > code that triggers the FTBFS and the code that doesn't.
> I've bisected the issue (building on Debian "testing" but without any
> patches applied).  It is fixed by the following commit:
> http://git.zytor.com/syslinux/syslinux.git/commit/?id=ff859050fa4e6535cae098dc35d88a265466448d
Reminder: partial revert of that commit (already in 6.04-pre1):


Quoting Peter (hpa) in a related discussion about those 2 commits:
 "OK, so something is still an issue."

That "pending issue" was not resolved, even though the bug report was 
closed (because the OP got the conflict, in his specific 
OS/environment, resolved by those commits).
> Regards
> Lukas

Thank you for the tests and feedback.


More information about the Syslinux mailing list