Re: Bug#250086: extipl: please add amd64 support
Hi. Thank you for your attention.
with "Re: Bug#250086: extipl: please add amd64 support",
Goswin von Brederlow <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> mrvn@frosties:~% apt-cache show extipl
> Package: extipl
> Version: 5.04-18.104.22.168.pure64
> Filename: pool/unstable/main/amd64/e/extipl/extipl_5.04-22.214.171.124.pure64_amd64.deb
> Description: Yet Another Boot Selector for IBM-PC compatibles.
> Extended-IPL is a boot selector which is upper compatible with
> original IBM IPL. This package includes the installer for this
> boot code which is written into MBR of your hard disk.
> With this boot selector, you can select a partition from
> all the partitions including the logical partitions as well as
> the primary ones in all the BIOS supported disks when booting a PC,
> and then it will boot up the OS reside at the selected partition.
> installed-size: 24
> 'residing on' or 'that resides on'
I'll update the description in the next upload.
> Is that from your patch or another one?
That amd64 package (5.04-126.96.36.199.pure64) may have been
created by Christopher L Cheney. changes file for it
has the "Changed-By" line.
> > Extipl uses syscall5 _llseek on i386 to reach the right sector
> > in the hard disk where the boot code is installed in.
> > So I'm afraid that it can't work on pure 64bit environment.
> > But if any amd64 system can run all i386 32bit code,
> > then it might run that _llseek system call too.
> It should not use _llseek on i386 either. The right way is to define
> 64bit file operations (LFS) and use the normal lseek (which then uses
> 64bit off_t).
Maybe. I'll consult it with the upstream later.
# When the extipl began to use __llseek on linux,
# there are both of libc5 systems and glibc2 systems.
# So __llseek was the simplest way at that time,
# or it seemed that, at least.
# Now I hope that we can use lseek64 on most of linux systems,
# can't we ?
Taketoshi Sano: <email@example.com>,<firstname.lastname@example.org>,<email@example.com>