iso2flash img

[Thomas Schmitt]

Hi,

Da Rock <freebsd-hackers at herveybayaustralia.com.au> wrote:
> It shows isolinux 4.04, blah blah, and a blinking cursor. It goes no further
> than that, which I why I commented that it seemed an unlikely solution.

If it can say "isolinux" then the boot process has succeeded as far
as the boot sectors of the ISO image are responsible.


> The system is an Acer AspireOne Netbook D255. I'm using an i386 image
> because its only an Atom.

Can you try whether the Ubuntu image boots from CD or DVD ?


> I did test a amd64 system and it worked though... hmmm. I wonder if they
> mixed up their images? That'd be a funny cock-up :D

At that stage you are still in the SYSLINUX/ISOLINUX system. Afaik, there
is no 64 bit version of it. So that one can hardly be totally unsuitable
for 32 bit systems.

I am not familiar with the entrails of the boot loaders. Maybe you can get
help at the SYSLINUX mailing list syslinux at zytor.com.
  http://www.zytor.com/mailman/listinfo/syslinux

Google "ubuntu atom isolinux" finds an older issue:
  https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/774552
points to
  https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/syslinux/+bug/617779
  "Just type "help" on the BOOT prompt, and when you get the help menu,
   just hit enter. The system will now boot!"

Does ISOLINUX allow you to enter commands ?

------------------------------------

One thing comes to my mind which you could try. It is quite unlikely
to be the culprit though:

By a bug in xorriso-1.0.8 the image size is not aligned to a full
megabyte, as is prescribed for isohybrid.
So you could try to set the end of the USB stick DOS partition 1 to
the next higher multiple of 2048 disk blocks minus 1.
(Make sure that no block content gets changed after byte 64 * 512.)

If this happens to work, then we should inform Ubuntu to upgrade
their xorriso to 1.1.0 or later.
(Up to now i only know that the correct size silences warnings of
 Linux fdisk about "different physical/logical beginnings".)


Have a nice day :)

Thomas