It is currently Wed Jul 30, 2014 9:22 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Integrating WinXP Setup CD to UBCD vs RockRidge
PostPosted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:33 am
Posts: 4
Hi,
UBCD is great and very usefull. It is better than the other "bootCD" because it can integrate them!
Since I ve discover the customizing possibilities, I would like to integrate also the Windows XP Setup CD.

I've add the following in my custom.scn file:
print " [F4] Setup Windows XP SP2 Professional "
if ($lastKey == key[f4]); then isolinux /boot/images/w2ksect.bin

The given mkisofs command "mkisofs -N -J -r -o \ubcd.iso -b boot/loader.bin -no-emul-boot -boot-load-size 4 ubcd"
freeze the computer when I press F4 (Isolinux is launched, but the winNT sector can not launch NTLR)

Then, I tested many parameters to mkisofs (see below)

Actually, it appears that WinXP CD (suppose it applied to all WinNT) is incompatible with the rockRidge extension. The WinXP setup start only when I removed the "-r" option.

Besides, I saw a pb with the RockRidge (that is, with the "-r" option activated) extension under linux:
Due to long filename limitation, a "rr_moved" dir is created on the root of the CD with "-r", causing some deep directories not be readable under linux.
This pb can be resolved by adding "-l -D" (up to 31 char in filename and deep directory: Why is mkisofs limited to 6 dir when Windows tools (nero, ...) goes to 8 ?)
But the long dir and filename cannot be read under old OS like MSDOS.

The question is: 1/ where are the RockRidge extension realy needed? Will I have problem by desactivating them?
I ve tested the iso with only joliet, and all small linux distribution of the UBCD can read it. It is indeed better than RR because it avoid the previous "rr_moved" problem.

Finally, the best command I found is
"mkisofs -N -J -joliet-long -D -V "UltimateBootCD" -log-file mkisofs.log -o ubcd.iso -b boot/loader.bin -no-emul-boot -boot-load-size 4 ubcd"

2/ I've just seen UBCD4Win, but is is NOT the same stuff.
"UBCD4Win is a Windows® "pre-install" environment, basically Windows® booted from CD" whereas I just want to copy the WinXP Installation CD.
Other solution / mkisofs option are welcome to enhance my CD!


I suggest to update the customize page on the website with this information (RockRidge extension with NT CD).

--------- other parameters tested -------------------------------

Before I've read the tutorial "Integrating a Windows Boot Disk into Ultimate Boot CD"
I've tried with "memdisk", "bcdw boot" and "discemu". And also with "chain" that I saw in 911CD.
Now, I think isolinux is the good command.

Then, I tested many parameters to mkisofs (version 2.01a17)

I had to remove the "-r" option in order that WinXP installation can start. "-R" make the same as "-r".

Then I wanted to remove the the warnings about the the too long filename and dirname (more than 6 sucessive dir).
the "-iso-level 4" (ISO-9660:1999 version2) option in mkisofs resolve these problems, but is not compatible with the loader.bin (the CD does not boot anymore)

For the too deep directories, the "-D" option accept them. And the "-l" option solve the too long filename (up to 31 char)

Then, I understood these function only affect the cd when no joliet extension can be loaded (means is is ignored under Windows that read the joliet layer)

So it works with the following command:
"mkisofs -N -J -joliet-long -l -D -V "UltimateBootCD" -o \ubcd.iso -b boot/loader.bin -no-emul-boot -boot-load-size 4 ubcd"
It seems to works well, despite I already know that the long filename would not work under dos.

I was also made wrong about the long name with WinImage6: the software read the Joliet layer only if I had RockRidge (without RR, it read as DOS would) !


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 10:59 pm
Posts: 1274
Check out this tutorial "Integrating a Windows Boot Disk into Ultimate Boot CD" at:

http://www.ultimatebootcd.com/tutorials.html

for more information.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 12:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:33 am
Posts: 4
As said, I ve already read this tutorial!
But it is not complet and not work because of the RockRidge extension!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 12:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 10:59 pm
Posts: 1274
My apologies for barking up the wrong tree. I reread the original message and now understand what you are trying to say. I will add a link to your message from the customization page.

One question: what does "-joliet-long" do? Couldn't find it in the man page.

BTW, I just had a related problem with the RockRidge extension today which I wish to share. I was helping someone integrate a Linux-based antivirus software ISO into UBCD. I was encountering problems (cannot mount CDROM), and traced it down to the "-r" (RockRidge) switch. After removing that swtich, everything was OK. Just a note to those who might be hitting similar problems with integration. You can try removing the "-r" switch from mkisofs.

Do you guys think I should remove "-r" in the next release? Since the files with long filenames are primarily restricted to the "docs" folder, it does seem that "-l" is sufficient and shouldn't cause any problems to the DOS apps. Hence, it appear that we can remove the "-r" switch by default.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 13, 2005 12:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:33 am
Posts: 4
You build the UBCD with the "-l" switch?
I suppose you do because there is no "rr_moved" directory on your disc, which come without this switch when "-r" is used.

The question stay: what brings the RockRidge extension to the CD?
Or what do we lose without it?

After a quick seach on google, it seems that RockRidge permit a better management of read rights ("chmod" style, groups supported). Not very useful here.
"The Rock Ridge extensions to ISO-9660 define a way for UNIX-isms like long mixed-case filenames and symbolic links to be supported."
(from http://thproxy.jinr.ru/file-archive/doc ... aq03.html#[3-5-2])
Symbolic link are more interesting, but again, there is none here.


Joliet is supported in Linux kernel since the 2.0.36 (I remember it was kernel of my first linux distrib, RedHat 5.1 from 1999 I think).

So I suppose that the RockRidge are usefull for old linux kernel and probably other UNIX systems.

I did not find any article comparing Joliet and RockRidge under linux. What I say before is that Joliet may be better than RR for linux because of the long filename.


The -joliet-long allows filename up to 103 char (read in mkisofs).
I suppose it nearly corresponds to what some burning software call "romeo".
Joliet up to 64 char, Romeo up to 128.
Actually, I don't realy know if it is needed in the UBCD, I read it on the tutorial, and it doesn't seem to bother.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Integrating WinXP Setup CD to UBCD vs RockRidge
PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 2:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 10:59 pm
Posts: 1274
Thanks for the info. Looks like we definitely do not have to include
RockRidge extension for newer versions of UBCD.

BTW, I just want to confirm this point. Are you saying that when you use
the "-l" switch, DOS apps won't be able to access files with long
filenames? Is that the reason why you didn't use "-l" in your final
"best" command line?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Integrating WinXP Setup CD to UBCD vs RockRidge
PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 8:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:33 am
Posts: 4
Victor Chew wrote:
Thanks for the info. Looks like we definitely do not have to include
RockRidge extension for newer versions of UBCD.


It would be great if we had the point of view of unix/linux users/experts to confim this point. I suppose you know some of them among those who are updating the linux tools in your UBCD .

Victor Chew wrote:
BTW, I just want to confirm this point. Are you saying that when you use
the "-l" switch, DOS apps won't be able to access files with long
filenames? Is that the reason why you didn't use "-l" in your final
"best" command line?


Yes, I made one try with "-l", which is valid for long file and dir names.
Then I started under dos6.2/win3.1 (nostalgy!), and the OS was not able to enter to the long directory.
Without the "-l", the shorted dirnames stay accessible.

PS: As you probably also do, I've made most of the test with a PC emulation software, an "old" (before it belongs to MS) version of VirtualPC in my case. It works great and make the tests very easier than rebooting the PC.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Protected by Anti-Spam ACP Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group