Re: continued problems with 2.88 meg image
On Mon, Aug 31, 1998 at 05:13:01PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 1998, Jeff Noxon wrote:
> > I've often wondered if what you're trying to do is possible. Can you
> > boot a 2.88 meg CD image on a machine with a BIOS that doesn't even
> > support 2.88 meg drives? Inquiring minds want to know.
> Am I really the first person to try this?
Do you really want to know the answer? :)
> It was my understanding that the -s option on syslinux bypassed the bios
> and provided its own routines.
I must admit I don't know much about syslinux.
> > Can you create a 1.44 meg image using the same steps you used to create
> > the 2.88 meg image, and try agin? That should tell you what the problem
> > is -- your method, or SysLinux/BIOS. See if you can boot the resulting
> > 1.44 meg image from the floppy drive, and then again from CD.
> I didn't bother to burn a CD to test, but the same process (only reducing
> the -s option to 18) when copied to a floppy works fine.
> > Did you place a valid boot sector on your 2.88 image? I don't think
> I supposed that mformat or syslinux did that. There is certainly one on
> the 1.44 meg image I built.
> > any of the Linux tools will write a valid MBR. You can copy one from a
> > DOS formatted 1.44 meg disk. (Use dd to write the first 512 bytes.)
> What suggests that "Linux tools" don't write valid MBRs? The rescue
> floppies are all built with "Linux tools". Why should this one image be
When I used format floppies with mtools, they didn't have valid boot
records. They would just lock up the machine if I booted with one in
Again, I don't know about syslinux or the normal boot disc creation
process. What you're saying makes sense.
> > > Loading Boot record from CDROM..Not found
> > These messages seem to suggest the absence of a valid floppy boot record.
> But the other machine recognized the drive and image. The machine that
> says "Not Found" also takes about a minute (on a 16x drive) "looking" at
> the CD before it decides this. I suspect that the error drops out
> differently, but for the same reasons on each machine.
It's a shame the error messages are so generic. :)
> I have looked at the two files, and they have slightly different boot
> records, as well as the 2.88 image declaring FAT16, while the 1.44 image
> is declared FAT12
Can you format a FAT16 1.44 meg disk? I wonder if syslinux is making an
assumption that a floppy is FAT12? It's a stretch...
> This is beginning to look like a BIOS problem, as syslinux doesn't even
> get started (no prompt). Probably with the bios not recognizing the drive
> type of the image :-(
Likely, but who knows.
> Know anyone with a 2.88 meg drive?
I've asked around here ... no bites.
> > Good luck,
> It appears that I need more than I have ;-)
Sorry I couldn't be more helpful... :(