Debian Bug report logs - #750586
syslinux-common: Boot fails. Failed to load ldlinux.c32. File must be in /. Upstream bug

Reply or subscribe to this bug.

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: ewew <m.alfaeko@gmail.com>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: syslinux-common: Boot fails. Failed to load ldlinux.c32. File must be in /. Upstream bug

Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 20:59:01 +0200

Package: syslinux-common
Version: 3:6.03~pre1+dfsg-4 and others
Severity: grave
Tags: d-i upstream
Justification: renders package unusable

After many time spend on testing. I have found solution to problem described
in bug reports #749991 and #750244. It is comfirmed that netboot.tar.gz for SID 
has been built with wrong kernel modules. After spend time with building my own
netboot.tar.gz i have found the solution to error failed to load ldlinux.c32.
This bug has been reintroduced by the upstrem and causes following error.
This info is available on syslinux mailing lists. I also found this problem
seems to be presend in debian-cd bug #699884, but not tested.
Other info is available on debian-devel mailing lists with subject "Possible 
kernel modules missmatch in netboot.tar.gz for debian testing".

Thank You

Have nice day

ewew

Message #18 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org>

To: Ron <ron@debian.org>, 756275@bugs.debian.org

Cc: 750586@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#756275: debian-installer: [PATCH] Fix lib location and search path for syslinux >= 5

Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 13:46:06 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Control: severity 750586 important
Control: found 756275 20140802

Ron <ron@debian.org> (2014-07-28):
> As discussed on #-boot, here's a minimal patch to fix pxeboot with the
> current daily images.

Thanks.

> This patch possibly also means you can close #750586 and several of
> the other bugs referenced there, but my secret decoder ring broke
> trying to figure out what his real problem(s) were, so I've kept this
> separate to that.

I'm lowering the severity of #750586 since I feel important is enough.
> 
> And this bug is unversioned, since it only effects the daily snapshots
> after the syslinux update, and the last tagged release was before
> that.

We have a release with this bug now, so "found"ing it.

> On a slight tangent to this:
> 
> I do wonder a little if we ought to rearrange the netboot.tar tree a
> bit in the light of this change, since we basically have 3 things there
> with varying degrees of interdependence between both themselves and
> alternative images that people might want to boot from the same tftpd.
> 
>  - pxelinux.0 (and its associated .c32 binaries)
> 
>    Since the commonly used way to boot multiple images is to share
>    this between all of them and then use a custom top level menu to
>    select the actual tree to boot from, but the .c32 binaries that
>    we embed in $arch/boot-screens aren't compatible with different
>    syslinux versions of pxelinux.0.
> 
>    So possibly we should pull all the .c32 files out of boot-screens
>    (and possibly out of $arch too, since they are now all 32-bit ELF
>    executables even for amd64), and put them in their own tree where
>    they can easily be shared and be from the same syslinux version.
> 
>  - the menu .cfg files
> 
>    Which should always be compatible with newer versions of vesamenu.c32
>    and really only change when different options are added.  They only
>    depend on a particular kernel and initrd to the extent of:
>    - the path they expect to find them at
>    - the options they append for the installer in the initrd.
> 
>    In theory, some of these at least could be arch independent, since
>    it's only the hardcoded paths to the kernel images that make them
>    not so, and the options they append which may make them release
>    dependent.
> 
>    So possibly these should be split between 'release' and 'arch'
>    dirs (unless there's some way to make $arch a runtime variable
>    in which case they may could all be just release dependent.
> 
>  - the kernel and initrd images
> 
>    Which are obviously arch dependent, but could be updated
>    independently of the menu files for point releases etc.
> 
> Anyhow, the above is really a separate 'bug', if it's a bug at all,
> but I figured I'd mention it here since it is relevant in the context
> of the incompatible change to syslinux which this bug is about.  I'll
> leave it to you guys to decide whether it should be cloned as such,
> taken to the list for Further Discussion, or /dev/null'd as SEP :)

Thanks for all the details.

Since I don't know much about all these things I'm tempted not to touch
anything beyond unbreaking netboot.tar.gz; even more so since there
seems to be an attached, tested patch. :)

I could apply it blindly but it'd be nice if someone else would confirm
it works fine. I've got other things cooking, but I might end up testing
it myself it nobody steps up.

Mraw,
KiBi.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #25 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Kuehl <ckuehl@ocf.berkeley.edu>

To: 756275@bugs.debian.org, Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org>, Ron <ron@debian.org>

Cc: 750586@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#756275: debian-installer: [PATCH] Fix lib location and search path for syslinux >= 5

Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2014 14:28:24 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi all,

Thanks for your work on this -- we're also experiencing this bug in both
jessie and sid daily netboot images in our PXE boot environment.

On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 01:46:06PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> I could apply it blindly but it'd be nice if someone else would confirm
> it works fine. I've got other things cooking, but I might end up testing
> it myself it nobody steps up.

I might be building the image wrong, but after applying Ron's patch, I
get a symlink like the following in my netboot tarball:

ldlinux.c32 -> debian-installer/amd64/debian-installer/amd64/boot-screens//ldlinux.c32

Note that ``d-i/$arch'' is duplicated, and there is an extra slash
before ``ldlinux.c32''.

During my build, the relevant vars were:

    NETBOOT_PATH=debian-installer/amd64
    BOOT_SCREEN_DIR=debian-installer/amd64/boot-screens/

I've attached a small patch (intended to be applied after Ron's) which
fixes the target path of the symlink on my sid build.

With these two patches applied, the sid netboot image boots and installs
successfully in our environment. I'd be more than happy to help test any
additional work on this issue.

Thanks!
Chris

[0001-Fix-ldlinux.c32-symlink-path.patch (text/x-diff, attachment)]

Message #30 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ron <ron@debian.org>

To: Chris Kuehl <ckuehl@ocf.berkeley.edu>

Cc: 756275@bugs.debian.org, Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org>, Ron <ron@debian.org>, 750586@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#756275: debian-installer: [PATCH] Fix lib location and search path for syslinux >= 5

Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 17:41:00 +0930

On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 02:28:24PM -0700, Chris Kuehl wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Thanks for your work on this -- we're also experiencing this bug in both
> jessie and sid daily netboot images in our PXE boot environment.
> 
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 01:46:06PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > I could apply it blindly but it'd be nice if someone else would confirm
> > it works fine. I've got other things cooking, but I might end up testing
> > it myself it nobody steps up.
> 
> I might be building the image wrong,

No, it looks like you did everything right afaics :)

That was a blind and untested patch, working backward from what I'd
hand-hacked in place to get it working for me, at the end of a long
day, and the first time I'd ever even looked at this code ...

It looks like I read $(TEMP_NETBOOT_DIR)/$(BOOT_SCREEN_DIR) wrong in
the surrounding code and assumed BOOT_SCREEN_DIR only had the
"/boot-screens" part in it.  Or at least that's the only thing I can
think I must have done, since now that you've pointed, and I'm looking
at it again, your version of that link definitely looks like the right
one to me.

Indeed amd64/netboot.cfg has:
BOOT_SCREEN_DIR = $(NETBOOT_PATH)/boot-screens/

Only the ia64 version appears to define or use it how I used it there.

Thanks for actually testing this and sending a fixed patch!

  Cheers,
  Ron


> but after applying Ron's patch, I
> get a symlink like the following in my netboot tarball:
> 
> ldlinux.c32 -> debian-installer/amd64/debian-installer/amd64/boot-screens//ldlinux.c32
> 
> Note that ``d-i/$arch'' is duplicated, and there is an extra slash
> before ``ldlinux.c32''.
> 
> During my build, the relevant vars were:
> 
>     NETBOOT_PATH=debian-installer/amd64
>     BOOT_SCREEN_DIR=debian-installer/amd64/boot-screens/
> 
> I've attached a small patch (intended to be applied after Ron's) which
> fixes the target path of the symlink on my sid build.
> 
> With these two patches applied, the sid netboot image boots and installs
> successfully in our environment. I'd be more than happy to help test any
> additional work on this issue.
> 
> Thanks!
> Chris

> From 89f74fdc2893a68d2baba8d13cff4846d92840e8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Chris Kuehl <ckuehl@ocf.berkeley.edu>
> Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2014 21:00:11 +0000
> Subject: [PATCH] Fix ldlinux.c32 symlink path
> 
> The existing symlink creates a target path like:
> debian-installer/amd64/debian-installer/amd64/boot-screens//ldlinux.c32
> 
> (note the duplicate of "d-i/amd64/" and the double slash after boot-screens)
> ---
>  build/config/x86.cfg | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/build/config/x86.cfg b/build/config/x86.cfg
> index 07f99b8..0bcd2a9 100644
> --- a/build/config/x86.cfg
> +++ b/build/config/x86.cfg
> @@ -393,7 +393,7 @@ arch_netboot_dir: x86_syslinux
>  	ln -sf $(NETBOOT_PATH)/pxelinux.0 $(TEMP_NETBOOT_DIR)/pxelinux.0
>  	# This link is required because pxelinux only looks in the tftp root
>  	# for this library (it does a PATH search for any others).
> -	ln -sf $(NETBOOT_PATH)/$(BOOT_SCREEN_DIR)/ldlinux.c32 $(TEMP_NETBOOT_DIR)/ldlinux.c32
> +	ln -sf $(BOOT_SCREEN_DIR)ldlinux.c32 $(TEMP_NETBOOT_DIR)/ldlinux.c32
>  
>  	set -e; \
>  	$(foreach file,$(wildcard $(TEMP_BOOT_SCREENS)/*.txt), \
> -- 
> 2.1.0
> 

Message #35 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org>

To: Ron <ron@debian.org>

Cc: Chris Kuehl <ckuehl@ocf.berkeley.edu>, 756275@bugs.debian.org, 750586@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#756275: debian-installer: [PATCH] Fix lib location and search path for syslinux >= 5

Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 13:57:55 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Ron <ron@debian.org> (2014-09-21):
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 02:28:24PM -0700, Chris Kuehl wrote:
> > Thanks for your work on this -- we're also experiencing this bug in
> > both jessie and sid daily netboot images in our PXE boot
> > environment.
> > 
> > On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 01:46:06PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > > I could apply it blindly but it'd be nice if someone else would
> > > confirm it works fine. I've got other things cooking, but I might
> > > end up testing it myself it nobody steps up.
> > 
> > I might be building the image wrong,
> 
> No, it looks like you did everything right afaics :)
> 
> That was a blind and untested patch, working backward from what I'd
> hand-hacked in place to get it working for me, at the end of a long
> day, and the first time I'd ever even looked at this code ...
> 
> It looks like I read $(TEMP_NETBOOT_DIR)/$(BOOT_SCREEN_DIR) wrong in
> the surrounding code and assumed BOOT_SCREEN_DIR only had the
> "/boot-screens" part in it.  Or at least that's the only thing I can
> think I must have done, since now that you've pointed, and I'm looking
> at it again, your version of that link definitely looks like the right
> one to me.
> 
> Indeed amd64/netboot.cfg has:
> BOOT_SCREEN_DIR = $(NETBOOT_PATH)/boot-screens/
> 
> Only the ia64 version appears to define or use it how I used it there.
> 
> Thanks for actually testing this and sending a fixed patch!

Looks like I could just blindly apply both patches, squashing them and
crediting both of you then?

It was low-priority (especially since untested) and I wasn't too keen on
spending time on it, but if we have success reports, merging looks like
a good idea.

Mraw,
KiBi.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #40 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Kuehl <ckuehl@ocf.berkeley.edu>

To: Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org>

Cc: Ron <ron@debian.org>, 756275@bugs.debian.org, 750586@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#756275: debian-installer: [PATCH] Fix lib location and search path for syslinux >= 5

Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 15:51:52 -0700

On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 01:57:55PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Looks like I could just blindly apply both patches, squashing them and
> crediting both of you then?

Yup, I think that would do it.

I can do additional sanity testing of the daily build after the patches
are applied, but already did pretty extensive testing on the netboot
image yesterday with the patches applied.

Thanks!
Chris

Message #45 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ron <ron@debian.org>

To: Chris Kuehl <ckuehl@ocf.berkeley.edu>

Cc: Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org>, Ron <ron@debian.org>, 756275@bugs.debian.org, 750586@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#756275: debian-installer: [PATCH] Fix lib location and search path for syslinux >= 5

Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 11:25:53 +0930

On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 03:51:52PM -0700, Chris Kuehl wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 01:57:55PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > Looks like I could just blindly apply both patches, squashing them and
> > crediting both of you then?
> 
> Yup, I think that would do it.
> 
> I can do additional sanity testing of the daily build after the patches
> are applied, but already did pretty extensive testing on the netboot
> image yesterday with the patches applied.

Yeah, that works for me too.  I wasn't in a hurry to push this until
someone had actually tested the patch either (and I got buried again
and didn't get to that myself), but I know that what it was _intended_
to do really works, so if it's been tested now, getting it into the
dailies for wider testing seems like a good plan.

  Cheers,
  Ron

Message #50 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org>

To: Ron <ron@debian.org>, 750586@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Chris Kuehl <ckuehl@ocf.berkeley.edu>, 756275@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#750586: Bug#756275: debian-installer: [PATCH] Fix lib location and search path for syslinux >= 5

Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2014 00:41:29 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Control: tag 756275 pending

Ron <ron@debian.org> (2014-09-22):
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 03:51:52PM -0700, Chris Kuehl wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 01:57:55PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > > Looks like I could just blindly apply both patches, squashing them and
> > > crediting both of you then?
> > 
> > Yup, I think that would do it.
> > 
> > I can do additional sanity testing of the daily build after the patches
> > are applied, but already did pretty extensive testing on the netboot
> > image yesterday with the patches applied.
> 
> Yeah, that works for me too.  I wasn't in a hurry to push this until
> someone had actually tested the patch either (and I got buried again
> and didn't get to that myself), but I know that what it was _intended_
> to do really works, so if it's been tested now, getting it into the
> dailies for wider testing seems like a good plan.

So Matt Taggart reported this on IRC and this reminded me I had it on
my todo list.

Pushed to master. Thanks again!

Mraw,
KiBi.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #55 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org>

To: 750586@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Problem continues to exist

Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 11:14:12 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Unfortunately, ldlinux.c32 is still being sought and not found. Any
news?

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o> @martinkrafft
: :'  :  proud Debian developer
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems

[digital_signature_gpg.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #60 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Harry ." <voldermort@hotmail.com>

To: "750586@bugs.debian.org" <750586@bugs.debian.org>

Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 13:18:50 +0000

This is still a show-stopper in RC1.
 		 	   		  

Message #65 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org>

To: martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org>, 750586@bugs.debian.org, voldermort@hotmail.com

Cc: Chris Kuehl <ckuehl@ocf.berkeley.edu>

Subject: Re: Bug#750586: Problem continues to exist

Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 15:21:49 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org> (2015-01-29):
> Unfortunately, ldlinux.c32 is still being sought and not found. Any
> news?

It would be helpful if either of you could try and figure out what's
going on/why Ron's patch is insufficient/what needs to be changed to
get your usecase to work. At least Chris Kuehl (cc'd) was happy with
the change.

Mraw,
KiBi.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #70 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org>

To: Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org>

Cc: 750586@bugs.debian.org, voldermort@hotmail.com, Chris Kuehl <ckuehl@ocf.berkeley.edu>

Subject: Re: Bug#750586: Problem continues to exist

Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 15:38:19 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

also sprach Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org> [2015-02-15 15:21 +0100]:
> martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org> (2015-01-29):
> > Unfortunately, ldlinux.c32 is still being sought and not found. Any
> > news?
> 
> It would be helpful if either of you could try and figure out what's
> going on/why Ron's patch is insufficient/what needs to be changed to
> get your usecase to work. At least Chris Kuehl (cc'd) was happy with
> the change.

I thought this issue was actually resolved? With the new d-i-n-a
version, this now works for me.

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o> @martinkrafft
: :'  :  proud Debian developer
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
kill ugly radio
                                                        -- frank zappa

[digital_signature_gpg.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #75 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org>

To: martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org>, 750586@bugs.debian.org

Cc: voldermort@hotmail.com, Chris Kuehl <ckuehl@ocf.berkeley.edu>

Subject: Re: Bug#750586: Problem continues to exist

Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 15:50:12 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org> (2015-02-15):
> also sprach Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org> [2015-02-15 15:21 +0100]:
> > martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org> (2015-01-29):
> > > Unfortunately, ldlinux.c32 is still being sought and not found. Any
> > > news?
> > 
> > It would be helpful if either of you could try and figure out what's
> > going on/why Ron's patch is insufficient/what needs to be changed to
> > get your usecase to work. At least Chris Kuehl (cc'd) was happy with
> > the change.
> 
> I thought this issue was actually resolved? With the new d-i-n-a
> version, this now works for me.

If you think we can infer “martin is using d-i-n-a” from “Unfortunately,
ldlinux.c32 is still being sought and not found. Any news?” then I can
assure you that we cannot…

Mraw,
KiBi.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #80 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Kuehl <ckuehl@ocf.berkeley.edu>

To: Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org>

Cc: martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org>, 750586@bugs.debian.org, voldermort@hotmail.com

Subject: Re: Bug#750586: Problem continues to exist

Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 05:37:03 -0800

Hi again,

On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 03:21:49PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> It would be helpful if either of you could try and figure out what's
> going on/why Ron's patch is insufficient/what needs to be changed to
> get your usecase to work. At least Chris Kuehl (cc'd) was happy with
> the change.

Indeed, we have had no problems in the past few months.

I also just tested both the latest daily as well as the RC1 netboot
images on i386 and amd64 and can't replicate the problem on any
combination.

Thanks for your work on Debian.

Chris

Message #85 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org>

To: Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org>

Cc: 750586@bugs.debian.org, voldermort@hotmail.com, Chris Kuehl <ckuehl@ocf.berkeley.edu>

Subject: Re: Bug#750586: Problem continues to exist

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:49:41 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

also sprach Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org> [2015-02-15 15:50 +0100]:
> > I thought this issue was actually resolved? With the new d-i-n-a
> > version, this now works for me.
> 
> If you think we can infer “martin is using d-i-n-a” from “Unfortunately,
> ldlinux.c32 is still being sought and not found. Any news?” then I can
> assure you that we cannot…

Yeah, sorry about that. I now took another look and I think that
when I wrote in to the bug, I actually didn't have much of a clue
about the issue at hand and the problem wasn't applicable to me in
the first place.

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o> @martinkrafft
: :'  :  proud Debian developer
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
whatever you do will be insignificant,
but it is very important that you do it.
                                                     -- mahatma gandhi

[digital_signature_gpg.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #90 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Raphaël Halimi <raphael.halimi@gmail.com>

To: 750586@bugs.debian.org

Subject: More info

Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:48:43 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

I can confirm the bug with PXE boot.

I have a script ran daily in a cron job that mirrors several
Debian/Ubuntu netboot directories, sorts them in a "dists" directory by
distro/release/arch, modifies paths in the .cfg files to match my tree,
and symlinks a couple of files from one of those distros (I chose Debian
stable) in my PXE directory to provide the actual PXE boot, with a
custom menu to choose between distros (if I'm not mistaken, it's a
fairly common use case).

The PXE boot used to work by symlinking pxelinux.0 at the PXE root,
boot-screens/vesamenu.c32, and creating a modified copy of
pxelinux.cfg/default (again to have the paths match my tree).

After Jessie became stable, the PXE boot stopped working with this
"failed to load ldlinux.c32" error. Adding "path boot-screens/" to
pxelinux.cfg/default and symlinking ldlinux.c32 (amongst other .c32
files) in said boot-screens directory wasn't enough to make it work; I
had to additionally symlink ldlinux.c32 at the root of my tree to be
able to successfully boot from PXE.

I'm no coder so I can't look in the source code and be more precise, but
pxelinux.0 behaves as if it ignores this new "path" statement (in
pxelinux.cfg/default) regarding ldlinux.c32; but it's still correctly
interpreted for other c32 files, since pxelinux is able to find them in
the boot-screens directory.

Important note : mirroring the Jessie netboot directory to the root of
my PXE server (without any modification) didn't work either, since it
doesn't have ldlinux.c32 at its root; but netboot.tar.gz has it, so they
don't match - I'm not sure it can be considered as a regression (since
the netboot directory used to be a working PXE tree regardless of the
tarball contents) but I think it may explain why some people report it's
now working and others don't.

Hope it helps.

Regards,

-- 
Raphaël Halimi

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #97 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Mikaela Suomalainen <mikaela@mikaela.info>

To: 750586@bugs.debian.org

Subject: debian-8.2.0-amd64-DVD-1.iso

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 12:43:17 +0300

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Hi,

I am able to reproduce this issue with debian-8.2.0-amd64-DVD-1.iso
using older desktop PC which is from year 2006.

I thought Debian would be good for a little older PC and I wouldn't
have to worry about it so much, but it appears I must find another
distribution as this bug has been open since 2014.

- -- 
Mikaela Suomalainen
https://mikaela.info
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
Comment: Homepage: https://mikaela.info/
Comment: Fingerprint = 2910 4A46 C561 5BF9 78A0 83F2 0C20 7F07 B2F3 2B67
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=HD07
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Message #102 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: 黄刚 <hgzlp@hotmail.com>

To: "750586@bugs.debian.org" <750586@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Re: syslinux-common: Boot fails. Failed to load ldlinux.c32. File must be in /. Upstream bug

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 06:10:12 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,
I want to know if this bug have been fixed or not?I downloaded the netboot.tar.gz yesterday and can not boot by PXE. I got this error of failed to load ldlinux.c32Noticed this bug report already more than a year old, I would guess the solution should been compiled in the distributed netboot.tar.gz.Or I really have to build my own netboot.tar.gz?Thanks,GangOn Wed, 04 Jun 2014 20:59:01 +0200 ewew <m.alfaeko@gmail.com> wrote:> Package: syslinux-common> Version: 3:6.03~pre1+dfsg-4 and others> Severity: grave> Tags: d-i upstream> Justification: renders package unusable> > After many time spend on testing. I have found solution to problem described> in bug reports #749991 and #750244. It is comfirmed that netboot.tar.gz for SID > has been built with wrong kernel modules. After spend time with building my own> netboot.tar.gz i have found the solution to error failed to load ldlinux.c32.> This bug has been reintroduced by the upstrem and causes following error.> This info is available on syslinux mailing lists. I also found this problem> seems to be presend in debian-cd bug #699884, but not tested.> Other info is available on debian-devel mailing lists with subject "Possible > kernel modules missmatch in netboot.tar.gz for debian testing".> > Thank You> > Have nice day> > ewew> >  		 	   		  

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #107 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Md Asif <mdasif0092@hotmail.com>

Subject: Website Design Service

Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 10:44:21 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

HI Sir/Md Asif

Can you outsource some SEO business to us? We will work
according to you and your clients and for a Long term relationship.  

We will target in this Price More than 15 keywords.

Looking forward for your positive reply.

Best Regards!

Thanks.

Md Asif

skype: snehadixit9

Whatsapp : +919236546467

 

  		 	   		  

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #112 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Marcelo <marcelolaia@gmail.com>

To: 750586@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: syslinux-common: Boot fails. Failed to load ldlinux.c32. File must be in /. Upstream bug

Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 03:16:20 -0200

On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 12:43:17 +0300 Mikaela Suomalainen <mikaela@mikaela.info> wrote:

> I am able to reproduce this issue with debian-8.2.0-amd64-DVD-1.iso
> using older desktop PC which is from year 2006.
> 
> I thought Debian would be good for a little older PC and I wouldn't
> have to worry about it so much, but it appears I must find another
> distribution as this bug has been open since 2014.

Hi, I have same problem here with an old Notebook. I reproduce this bug with
debian-testing-amd64-netinst.iso builds 2016-02-10 23:57.

Please, what I could do to install Debian in that Notebook since this bug is
very old?

Thank you so much!

-- 
Marcelo

Message #117 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Christian Seiler <christian@iwakd.de>

To: 750586@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: syslinux-common: Boot fails. Failed to load ldlinux.c32. File must be in /. Upstream bug

Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 21:02:13 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Control: tags -1 + patch

Hi,

I've investigated this bug a bit because of a posting to debian-user@;
the original fix that went into Jessie fixes the netboot.tar.gz images.
The problem is that the installer data in the mirror doesn't contain
ldlinux.c32.

(For a more detailed analysis of the problem that I posted to
debian-user, see [1].)

Additionally, the default pxelinux.0 image from jessie onwards doesn't
support HTTP via gPXE/iPXE anymore, it only supports TFTP. So directly
using a HTTP mirror for PXE booting with gPXE/iPXE is possible up to
Wheezy, but not possible starting with Jessie anymore. I've reported
this against pxelinux as:
<https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=814459>

But there is an alternative image, lpxelinux.0, which implements HTTP
directly (and doesn't call out to gPXE/iPXE) that may be used instead
of pxelinux.0; it's already included in the pxelinux package from
Jessie onwards.

I've attached a patch against d-i git master that adds the ldlinux.c32
and lpxelinux.0 files to the mirror itself (and not just to the
netboot.tar.gz as before).

I verified that a Jessie installer created in a clean pbuilder
environment with that patch applied works as expected and has
ldlinux.c32 as well as lpxelinux.0 in both netboot.tar.gz files as
well as the mirror file system proper.

It would be great if this patch could be applied not only to Stretch
but also be part of the next point release in Jessie, so that booting
the Jessie installer directly from HTTP works again.

Thanks!

Regards,
Christian

[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/02/msg00295.html

[0001-Add-ldlinux.c32-and-lpxelinux.0-to-netboot-files-on-.patch (text/x-diff, attachment)]

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #124 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Diretoria de Pós-Graduação - PRPPG - UFVJM <dirpos@ufvjm.edu.br>

To: 750586@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: syslinux-common: Boot fails. Failed to load ldlinux.c32. File must be in /. Upstream bug

Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 20:05:35 -0200

Hi,

An iso-dvd (debian-testing-amd64-DVD-1.iso 2016-02-08 08:31) will be in the
same issue? Lack the ldlinux.c32 ?

Or I need to wait the maintainers to apply the patch?

My two notebook, different brand, have the same problem.

Thank you very much.

-- 
Marcelo

Message #129 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: allen thomas <allenthomas9090@gmail.com>

To: mdasif0092@hotmail.com

Subject: website design

Date: Sat, 21 May 2016 18:18:00 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Good day
I'm Thomas Allen,am hearing impaired.i would love to know if you can handle
website design for a new company and also if you do, you accept credit
cards? kindly get back to me ASAP so i can send you the job details.
Regards

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #134 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "USPS TechConnect" <eric.long@sysconverge.com>

To: 750586@bugs.debian.org

Subject: USPS parcel #9470215 delivery problem

Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 20:00:46 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Dear Customer,

Your item has arrived at December 17, but our courier was not able to deliver the parcel.

Please review delivery label in attachment!

Yours sincerely,
Eric Long,
USPS Senior Office Manager.

[Ground-Label-9470215.zip (application/zip, attachment)]

Message #144 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "USPS SameDay" <troy.henderson@us-sale.net>

To: 750586@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Notification status of your delivery (USPS 006694830)

Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2016 18:35:40 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Dear Customer,

Your item has arrived at December 23, but our courier was not able to deliver the parcel.

Review the document that is attached to this e-mail!

Thank you,
Troy Henderson,
USPS Parcels Delivery Manager.

[Item-Delivery-Details-006694830.zip (application/zip, attachment)]

Message #149 received at 750586@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "USPS SameDay" <jesus.neal@topnotchcontractors.co.uk>

To: 750586@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Notification status of your delivery (USPS 3042402)

Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 20:44:50 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Dear Customer,

Your parcel was successfully delivered December 28 to USPS Station, but our courier cound not contact you.

Please check the attachment for details!

With anticipation,
Jesus Neal,
USPS Chief Office Manager.

[Delivery-Details-3042402.zip (application/zip, attachment)]

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.