[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#757920: debian-installer: vesamenu.c32 is not a COM32R image

Hi Kim,

and thanks for your detailed bug report.

Kim R. T. Hansen <kim@rthansen.dk> (2014-08-12):
> Package: debian-installer
> Version: 
> Severity: normal
> Tags: d-i
> Dear Maintainer,
>    * What led up to the situation?
> I want to install Debian/testing on a new computer.
>    * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or
>      ineffective)?
> I upgraded the PXE installer for testing using di-netboot-assistant,
> then I tried to install with it.
>    * What was the outcome of this action?
> I expected the installer to run.
>    * What outcome did you expect instead?
> The installer failed with the error "vesamenu.c32 is not a COM32R image"
> (written from memory).
> When I compare the vesamenu.c32 files in the testing and daily
> installers with the same files from stable and some Ubuntu version there
> are some differences:
> * The working files have a size about 150kB and are "COM executable"
> * The problematic files have a size of 26kB and are "ELF 32-bit LSB shared object"
> This is an example of a good file: http://ftp.fr.debian.org/debian/dists/testing/main/installer-amd64/20140316/images/netboot/debian-installer/amd64/boot-screens/vesamenu.c32
> This is a bad file: http://ftp.fr.debian.org/debian/dists/testing/main/installer-amd64/20140802/images/netboot/debian-installer/amd64/boot-screens/vesamenu.c32

The fact you're using di-netboot-assistant is interesting, maybe it
would have needed an update for the syslinux 6 transition?

The code can be viewed online here:

It seems there's some *.c32-specific handling, and there's even a
mention of a (probably previous) transition for menu related files.

I think we would have had more reports if PXE was broken in the general
case so I suspect this might be a regression only in the d-i netboot
assistant case.

I'm adding Ron since he looked quite closely at d-i + syslinux lately,
so he might have some expertise to share here. ;)


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: