Bug#684865: live-build: lb_binary_syslinux fails to include flavour in menu entry
Package: live-build
Version: 3.0~a57-1
Severity: normal
lb_binary_syslinux has this piece of code:
# This is all rather suboptimal.. needs prettifying at some point
_FLAVOURS="$(echo ${LB_LINUX_FLAVOURS} | wc -w)"
case "${_FLAVOURS}" in
1)
mv binary/live/vmlinuz-* binary/live/vmlinuz
mv binary/live/initrd.img-* binary/live/initrd.img
sed -e "s|@FLAVOUR@|${LB_LINUX_FLAVOUR}|g" \
-e "s|@KERNEL@|/live/vmlinuz|g" \
-e "s|@INITRD@|/live/initrd.img|g" \
-e "s|@LB_BOOTAPPEND_LIVE@|${LB_BOOTAPPEND_LIVE}|g" \
-e "s|@LB_BOOTAPPEND_FAILSAFE@|${LB_BOOTAPPEND_FAILSAFE}|g" \
"${_TARGET}/live.cfg.in" >> "${_TARGET}/live.cfg"
Note the usage of ${LB_LINUX_FLAVOUR} which is unset instead of ${LB_LINUX_FLAVOURS}
which does really exist. The net result is that the isolinux menu entry looks
weird with empty parenthesis:
- live ()
- live ( failsafe)
FWIW, my config includes --linux-flavours <something>.
-- Package-specific info:
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers stable-updates
APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'proposed-updates'), (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable'), (150, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: amd64
Kernel: Linux 3.4-trunk-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=fr_FR.utf8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Versions of packages live-build depends on:
ii cdebootstrap 0.5.9
ii debootstrap 1.0.42
Versions of packages live-build recommends:
ii cpio 2.11-8
ii gnu-fdisk 1.2.4-3.1
ii live-boot-doc 3.0~a38-1
ii live-config-doc 3.0.1-1
ii live-manual-html [live-manual] 1:3.0~a15-1
Versions of packages live-build suggests:
ii dosfstools 3.0.13-1
ii fakeroot 1.18.4-2
ii genisoimage 9:1.1.11-2
ii git 1:1.7.10.4-1
ii grub 0.97-66
ii memtest86+ 4.20-1.1
ii mtools 4.0.17-1
ii parted 2.3-10
pn squashfs-tools | mtd-tools <none>
ii sudo 1.8.5p2-1
ii syslinux 2:4.05+dfsg-6
ii uuid-runtime 2.20.1-5.1
pn win32-loader <none>
-- no debconf information
Reply to: