Re: [PATCH] util/grub-mkrescue: use capitalised paths for removable EFI images

[jeffbai]

Hi Thomas,

在 2024-06-13 16:30，Thomas Schmitt via Grub-devel 写道：
> Hi,
>
> Mingcong Bai wrote:
> > Thanks for your review. I will now submit v2.
>
> Well, it's not actually a review but rather pointing out a problem 
> which
> would probably cause a failure of the xorriso run, when the option
>   -hfs-bless-by i /System/Library/CoreServices/boot.efi
> does not find "boot.efi" because it would now be named "BOOT.EFI".
> I'd expect this message and no resulting ISO image:
>   xorriso : FAILURE : Cannot find path 
> '/System/Library/CoreServices/boot.efi' in loaded ISO image

Yes, good catch. I have removed this change in v2.

> I'm only qualified for judging the xorriso aspect of grub-mkrescue.
> The EFI aspect is mostly out of my scope. So i can't add a 
> "Reviewed-by:".

No worries, it's appreciated nonetheless.

> Two more thoughts which came to me since monday:
>
> - Which of the platforms did you actually test ?
>   (I would be astonished if GRUB_INSTALL_PLATFORM_I386_EFI and
>   GRUB_INSTALL_PLATFORM_X86_64_EFI were among them, because else 
> xorriso
>   should have thrown above error.)

I was testing for loongarch64-efi. As noted in the commit message, I 
found that Loongson's firmware incapable of handling non-upper-case EFI 
boot paths (which grub-install happens to evade, as it creates 
upper-case paths and filenames in the first place).

And yes, with the boot.efi change removed, there shouldn't be any more 
error - right?

> - The new name "BOOTx64.EFI" isn't actually all uppercase.
>   I am aware that the specs indeed mention the name that way in UEFI 
> 2.8
>   table 15. But that table is obviously buggy by calling in column 1
>   all three RISC-V architectures "32-bit".
>   So the lowercase "x" in "BOOTx64.EFI" might be an old typo in the 
> specs.
>   (It's already present in UEFI 2.4 table 12.)

Indeed, but I'm no one to argue with the specifications. I would be 
happy to hear what others have to say about this - should we stick with 
BOOTX64.EFI or use BOOTx64.EFI as ordered.

> Have a nice day :)
>
> Thomas
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Grub-devel mailing list
> Grub-devel@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel