Jump to content











Photo
- - - - -

Windows PE 5.x boot problem


  • Please log in to reply
85 replies to this topic

#76 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 13440 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 19 June 2015 - 07:09 PM

I no longer remember: The 32 bit and 64 bit bootmgr.efi file are identical? If so, my idea might also work?

I thought this was an established fact:

http://reboot.pro/to...oblem/?p=192616

 

:duff:

Wonko



#77 Balubeto Balubeto

Balubeto Balubeto

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 128 posts
  •  
    Italy

Posted 20 June 2015 - 07:08 AM

I thought this was an established fact:

http://reboot.pro/to...oblem/?p=192616

 

:duff:

Wonko

 

It is possible to create a single bootmgr.efi file?

It is possible to create an ISO image with two partitions so that one contains the 32-bit edition and the other the 64-bit edition of Windows PE 10.x?

 

Thanks

 

Bye



#78 cdob

cdob

    Gold Member

  • Expert
  • 1315 posts

Posted 20 June 2015 - 08:47 AM

It is possible to create a single bootmgr.efi file?

Only the OS manufacturer could create a reliable secre boot version. This won't happen.
No, it's not possible to create a single bootmgr.efi file.
 

It is possible to create an ISO image with two partitions so that one contains the 32-bit edition and the other the 64-bit edition of Windows PE 10.x?

There are no partitions at a ISO image.
VMware Player EFI fails at El Torito VHD hard disk image. http://reboot.pro/to...e-2#entry192651

#79 sikahr

sikahr
  • Members
  • 1 posts
  •  
    Croatia

Posted 14 October 2015 - 11:37 AM

I am not sure to understand how the described setup works (or should work on most machines), the BIOS is "normal" the EFI 64 bit is also normal, but the EFI 32 bit? :dubbio:

 

EFI32:
M:\EFI\BOOT\BOOTIA32.EFI->L:\efi\microsoft\boot\bcd->L:\boot\boot.sdi->L:\sources\bootia32.wim

 

The booted BOOTIA32.EFI attempts to actually load the L:\bootmgr.efi but since this latter is a 64 bit EFI it fails and then (as a failover) loads the L:\efi\microsoft\boot\bcd bypassing the L:\bootmgr.efi?

 

:duff:

Wonko

 

 

No, the DVD file \efi\bootia32.efi is a single file only, it dosn't search bootmgr.efi.
This file is intended to be launched from at (USB) disk.
The manufacturer dosn't support to run this from a DVD. Works in real world by chance.

 

 

Hi, sorry to ressurect old thread :)

 

Am I understand this correctly:

 

In Windows PE booting context,

 

For files boot32ia.efi & bootx64.efi respectivelly for x86&x64

there are two locations:

 

1. first is in the file system at \efi\boot\

2. second is inside floppy image used as El Torito boot sector file when making UEFI ISO image

second files are also present in the file system at \efi\microsoft\boot\ inside floppy image file efisys.bin

 

They are not the same files.

1. first files don't use bootmgr.efi in boot sequence  (bootmgr.efi is not needed for booting?)

2. second files use bootmgr.efi in boot sequence

 

Thanks in advance.



#80 cdob

cdob

    Gold Member

  • Expert
  • 1315 posts

Posted 14 October 2015 - 07:53 PM

@sikahr
Yes, that's it.

In addiion: UEFI specification requests FAT file system only.
This is \efi\boot\ at a USB flash drive.
And El Torito floppy image formated as FAT. It's \efi\boot\ still.

And to enhance the confusion:
Some UEFI implemenations enhance the specification and suppport NTFS or UDF file system.
A UDF DVD file system \efi\boot\ is readale. Again, the specification dosn't requesed this.

Different Windows version may show different results too.

Follow the basic rules. And expect the unexepected nontheless.

#81 memoarfaa

memoarfaa

    Member

  • Members
  • 79 posts
  •  
    Egypt

Posted 14 October 2015 - 08:34 PM

Only the OS manufacturer could create a reliable secre boot version. This won't happen.
No, it's not possible to create a single bootmgr.efi file.
 
There are no partitions at a ISO image.
VMware Player EFI fails at El Torito VHD hard disk image. http://reboot.pro/to...e-2#entry192651

may be you can sign your own bootmgr.efi

 

 

https://en.opensuse....File_Sign_Tools

 

https://wiki.ubuntu....Team/SecureBoot


Edited by memoarfaa, 14 October 2015 - 08:37 PM.


#82 Balubeto Balubeto

Balubeto Balubeto

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 128 posts
  •  
    Italy

Posted 11 May 2016 - 08:16 AM

By chance, now, it is possible to create a CD of Windows PE 10.x 32/64 bit (with the diagnostics and memory utilities 32/64) using only Windows 10 v1511? If so, what is the proper procedure to do this?

 

Logically, this CD will have to be able to boot with every type of firmware (BIOS or UEFI) of a computer.

 

Thanks

 

Bye



#83 cdob

cdob

    Gold Member

  • Expert
  • 1315 posts

Posted 11 May 2016 - 03:47 PM

By chance, now, it is possible to create a CD of Windows PE 10.x 32/64 bit (with the diagnostics and memory utilities 32/64) using only Windows 10 v1511?

No, it's not possible. The situation matches ADK 8.1.

#84 Balubeto Balubeto

Balubeto Balubeto

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 128 posts
  •  
    Italy

Posted 13 May 2016 - 04:49 PM

No, it's not possible. The situation matches ADK 8.1.

 

I was wrong to write:

 

By chance, now, it is possible to create a CD of Windows PE 10.x 32/64 bit (with the Windows Memory Diagnostic Utilities 32/64) using only Windows ADK 10 v1511? If so, what is the proper procedure to do this?

 

Logically, this CD will have to be able to boot with every type of firmware (BIOS or UEFI) of a computer.

 

Thanks

 

Bye



#85 cdob

cdob

    Gold Member

  • Expert
  • 1315 posts

Posted 13 May 2016 - 05:22 PM

using only Windows ADK 10 v1511

Yes, I did understand ADK.
No, it's not possible using only Windows ADK 10 v1511.
The situation matches ADK 8.1.

#86 Balubeto Balubeto

Balubeto Balubeto

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 128 posts
  •  
    Italy

Posted 13 May 2016 - 05:42 PM

Many thanks and sorry again

 

Thanks

 

Bye






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users