Jump to content











Photo
- - - - -

MakeIso


  • Please log in to reply
113 replies to this topic

#26 erwan.l

erwan.l

    Gold Member

  • Developer
  • 2278 posts
  • Location:Nantes - France
  •  
    France

Posted 31 December 2017 - 06:42 PM

FWIW...

Olof Lagerkvist (author of imdisk, among others) provides in his website a "geteltorito" command line program. Although its goal is not exactly to parse and show the boot catalog nor the (el torito) boot entries, perhaps its source code might help (developers) so as to develop a command line tool for such/similar purpose(s)?

Regarding xorriso and the options I mentioned before... Unfortunately (for Windows' users) the latest version for Windows available at this moment (v.1.3.4) does not support the relevant options ("-report_el_torito" and "-report_system_area") because they were introduced in xorriso v.1.3.8. I can only hope for a newer version/port for Windows' users.

 

About geteltorito : nice finding, thanks !

I may indeed look at source code although at this stage I am not too much into extracting boot file.

 

About xorriso (windows), I have been searching google but for now could not find any download.

I guess my google fu needs some improvement...

 

My main focus, for now, is is to handle as many possible boot loaders from MakeIso.

MS etfsboot.com and Grub4dos are easy.

Isolinux was some work but the routine is there now.

Currently working on Grub2.

 

The idea is to keep it simple for the end user : choose source folder, choose boot loader(s), choose target iso and push a button...



#27 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 14134 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 01 January 2018 - 12:32 PM

@erwan.l

Here is a xorriso build 1.4.2 Cygwin:

http://www.syslinux....ril/025112.html

https://eternallybor...g/misc/xorriso/

https://eternallybor....2-cygwin32.zip

 

Built expressly by a good guy (Jernej Simončič) :) upon a request by a "certain" ;) Ady. 

 

Just for the record, rigorously NOT tested by me.

 

And yes, your google-fu is low, but this was a tricky one, still it can be improved, if you are interested in some private lessons, we can arrange them somehow ;)

 

JFYI, and as said elsewhere: 

http://reboot.pro/to...eased/?p=204254

Thomas Schmitt (one of the main Authors of xorriso) is a good, nice peep, and he is usually open for suggestions/collaboorations, etc., so, if you find the tool useful as a reference or *whatever* I am sure you can have some productive exchange of ideas with him.

 

:duff:

Wonko



#28 ady

ady

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 155 posts

Posted 01 January 2018 - 05:07 PM

As a(nother) side note, developers that already have an appropriate cygwin environment could possibly try to build a newer version of "xorriso.exe". See:

 https://github.com/f...ster/libisoburn

Using a newer version of xorriso might be relevant in our context, considering that the changelog of xorriso 1.4.8 includes items (please read as "improvements") related to its command line option "-report_el_torito" as recent as June 2017.

@Wonko, I wouldn't mind replying to some of the additional details you posted in your previous post, but I'd like to keep the focus of this topic on Erwan's MakeIso program (and on whichever info/links/tools/code advance it). I hope that's OK.



#29 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 14134 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 01 January 2018 - 06:53 PM

@Wonko, I wouldn't mind replying to some of the additional details you posted in your previous post, but I'd like to keep the focus of this topic on Erwan's MakeIso program (and on whichever info/links/tools/code advance it). I hope that's OK.

Sure, start a new thread *anywhere* and we can discuss *anything* :).

Maybe in this same sub-forum here :unsure::

http://reboot.pro/fo...-project-forge/

 

:duff:

Wonko



#30 erwan.l

erwan.l

    Gold Member

  • Developer
  • 2278 posts
  • Location:Nantes - France
  •  
    France

Posted 01 January 2018 - 09:07 PM

Version 1.0.0.4 uploaded.

 

Boot table is now properly handled ("by the book") for Isolinux and Grub2 in ISO9660 mode.

 

Isolinux 5.10, Grub4Dos 0.4.6 and Grub 2.0.2 are packaged in the zip file so that one can easily made a bootable iso using one of these 3 boot loaders.

 

When selecting a source folder, MakeIso will try to detect a possible boot loader (grub2,grldr,isolinux,etfsboot,efisys) and will auto fill the boot loader field(s) : 2 mouse clicks should be what it takes to generate the ISO.



#31 erwan.l

erwan.l

    Gold Member

  • Developer
  • 2278 posts
  • Location:Nantes - France
  •  
    France

Posted 01 January 2018 - 09:15 PM

@Wonko

 

:worship: : no one can compete with your google fu - you are actually THE google fu master.

Even when it is not out there anymore, you will always manage to revive it using some way back machine.

 

I could definitely take some lessons from you, Sensei !

May be next time I take a trip to Italy, who knows.

 

After a few days working on the ISO specs, I have stumbled many times on Thomas Schmitt's name.

If I make some interesting finding or come with a worthy idea, I may approach him indeed.

For now, I am only starting my journey :)

 

Thanks goes to Ady as well for bringing lots of useful informations.

 

I have done one successful round of ISO now only to discover I need to redo the same exercice around UDF (different headers, descriptors, etc).



#32 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 14134 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 02 January 2018 - 11:32 AM

For now, I am only starting my journey  :)

Good :)

... I see that your attitude is the right one, which gives me reason for faith in the future of your new accomplishments ...

http://reboot.pro/to...nile#entry15859

;)

 

:duff:

Wonko



#33 ady

ady

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 155 posts

Posted 02 January 2018 - 04:02 PM

Isolinux 5.10, Grub4Dos 0.4.6 and Grub 2.0.2 are packaged in the zip file so that one can easily made a bootable iso using one of these 3 boot loaders.
 
When selecting a source folder, MakeIso will try to detect a possible boot loader (grub2,grldr,isolinux,etfsboot,efisys) and will auto fill the boot loader field(s) : 2 mouse clicks should be what it takes to generate the ISO.


If I understand correctly, the inclusion of bootloaders within the zip is just for users' convenience, correct? Unless a user specifically chooses to use the included binaries, there is nothing in MakeIso automatically selecting any of these particular bootloader binaries, correct?

Lets assume for a moment that a user builds a bootable ISO image by means of Erwan's MakeIso, but then it fails to boot (after some additional procedure performed by the same user, such as using a VM, or extracting the ISO image to a USB device, or burning some optical media, or...). There is a chance that there is no problem related to MakeIso, but this hypothetical user might approach Erwan anyway, claiming that MakeIso might be to blame for the boot failure/problem.

I fear that including (within the zip) specific versions of bootloaders might increase the chances of such potential confusion. Any thoughts?

#34 erwan.l

erwan.l

    Gold Member

  • Developer
  • 2278 posts
  • Location:Nantes - France
  •  
    France

Posted 02 January 2018 - 06:13 PM

If I understand correctly, the inclusion of bootloaders within the zip is just for users' convenience, correct? Unless a user specifically chooses to use the included binaries, there is nothing in MakeIso automatically selecting any of these particular bootloader binaries, correct?

Lets assume for a moment that a user builds a bootable ISO image by means of Erwan's MakeIso, but then it fails to boot (after some additional procedure performed by the same user, such as using a VM, or extracting the ISO image to a USB device, or burning some optical media, or...). There is a chance that there is no problem related to MakeIso, but this hypothetical user might approach Erwan anyway, claiming that MakeIso might be to blame for the boot failure/problem.

I fear that including (within the zip) specific versions of bootloaders might increase the chances of such potential confusion. Any thoughts?

 

True : purely for user convenience.

This way, not only can the user skip a google/download but also (and possibly more important) a default conf file is provided (menu.lst, grub.cfg, etc).

I do the same with TinyPXE Server : the zip contains some boot loaders (ipxe, pxelinux, etc).

The idea is to have a ready to use solution.

 

Now, I aggree : there are many scenarios, outside the scope of MakeIso, which could lead to a failure mostly depending on the booting device itself (physical or virtual).

Actually the TinyPXE Server reboot.pro thread is regularly (mis?)used with this scenario.

 

Side note, I personally use qemu when I want to quickly test an ISO (without having having to fuddle with hardware or heavier virtualisation platform).

 

For BIOS

qEmu.exe -L . -m 1024 -cdrom c:\_quickpe\x86\winre.iso -boot c -cpu Nehalem

Or for EFI

qemu.exe -L . -m 1024 -cdrom c:\_quickpe\x86\winre.iso -boot c -cpu Nehalem --bios OVMFIA32.fd


#35 ady

ady

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 155 posts

Posted 02 January 2018 - 06:59 PM

True : purely for user convenience.


If I may... I am curious as to the reason to include isolinux.bin 5.10 (I mean, why this specific version?). From all the versions of isolinux.bin that could be included/used, version 5.10 might be the less likely to succeed. If you are interested, I could suggest specific versions of ISOLINUX to be included, with some pros and cons, but I don't want to sidetrack this "MakeIso" topic.

PS: It could be just me, but I'm not sure that users/readers know how to download the very _latest_ version of MakeIso (or rather, where from), instead of the initial release.

#36 erwan.l

erwan.l

    Gold Member

  • Developer
  • 2278 posts
  • Location:Nantes - France
  •  
    France

Posted 02 January 2018 - 07:31 PM

If I may... I am curious as to the reason to include isolinux.bin 5.10 (I mean, why this specific version?). From all the versions of isolinux.bin that could be included/used, version 5.10 might be the less likely to succeed. If you are interested, I could suggest specific versions of ISOLINUX to be included, with some pros and cons, but I don't want to sidetrack this "MakeIso" topic.

PS: It could be just me, but I'm not sure that users/readers know how to download the very _latest_ version of MakeIso (or rather, where from), instead of the initial release.

 

This is a good question.

I have used the latest Isolinux 5.x version (i.e 5.10) as 6.0, 6.0.1 and 6.0.2 were troublesome.

Now, I am considering replacing Isolinux 5.10 by 6.0.3 as it seems stable.

What are your thoughts there?

Actually, this is not deviating too much from the main topic as one of the objectives I am seeking is to give the best chances to create a bootable iso at first shot.

 

About MakeIso latest version, the download link provided in the first post is always valid and pointing to latest release (hosted on my domain).

My signature also  contains links to most of my releases.



#37 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 14134 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 02 January 2018 - 07:50 PM

About MakeIso latest version, the download link provided in the first post is always valid and pointing to latest release (hosted on my domain).

 

That - conveniently - NEVER changes name so noone is ever able to know which §@ç#ing version he is getting.... :whistling:

 

@ady

JFYI, I tried:

http://reboot.pro/to...-19#entry187929

http://reboot.pro/to...-22#entry199771

 

 

:duff:

Wonko



#38 erwan.l

erwan.l

    Gold Member

  • Developer
  • 2278 posts
  • Location:Nantes - France
  •  
    France

Posted 02 January 2018 - 07:59 PM

That - conveniently - NEVER changes name so noone is ever able to know which §@ç#ing version he is getting.... :whistling:

 

@ady

JFYI, I tried:

http://reboot.pro/to...-19#entry187929

http://reboot.pro/to...-22#entry199771

 

 

:duff:

Wonko

 

To my defense, I learned from previous discussion : the zip now always contains a version.txt telling you which version it is about (next to a timestamp, md5, etc).

Added to that, the reboot.pro download page does report the version number (see here).

And last but not least, I always announce new version on this thread (which stands as the "support" thread also found in the initial download page).

In short, trust the developper : you will always one unique download link pointing to the latest release :)

 

Now, foreseing the next possible question: I want to keep the same filename simply because all web pages, forums, etc pointing to the download URL dont have to be re edited each time.



#39 ady

ady

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 155 posts

Posted 02 January 2018 - 09:42 PM

Now, I am considering replacing Isolinux 5.10 by 6.0.3 as it seems stable.
What are your thoughts there?


Selecting a specific version of ISOLINUX to include could be less straightforward than we (users and/or developers) would like it to be.

First of all, if a user extracts the content of an ISO image (that already uses ISOLINUX) with the purpose of editing it and then building a new ISO image, in most cases the general recommendation would be to use the same exact binaries (isolinux.bin, et al) that were already included within the original ISO; that is, unless the bootloader (ISOLINUX) itself or related files (e.g. vesamenu.c32) are having some problem (or when they are part of some tests with different versions).

Mixing different versions of boot files has been known to be a problem, not only for ISOLINUX. So, for most common use cases, the boot files to be included within the makeiso.zip should _not_ be recommended over those already included within original ISO images, unless there is a specific purpose for doing so.


Now, if the isolinux.bin file to be included in the zip is aimed to be used "alone" (e.g. no need for ISOLINUX's boot menu within the ISO image; no need of c32 modules other than the core one), then the "simplest" version of isolinux.bin would be 4.07.

*ISOLINUX 4.07:

_Pros:
__ Compatible with (i.e. supports) _most_ of the features being used in current (Linux) ISO images.
__ It doesn't need ldlinux.c32.
__ Correctly supports lss16 background boot images.

_Cons:
__ It is not the most common version of ISOLINUX "in the wild"; mixing it with c32 modules of other versions should be avoided, especially regarding chain.c32.


*ISOLINUX 5.xx-6.02:
There is no "good-enough" reason for a common user to use any of these ISOLINUX versions.

*ISOLINUX 6.03:

_Pros:
__ In theory, compatible with many currently-supported Linux ISO images (e.g. boot features, c32 modules, packages). In practice, Linux distributions have been patching the Syslinux-related packages, including ISOLINUX, with upstream commits, so the original upstream 6.03 is not exactly %100 the same as what the Linux distros are releasing in their ISO images. Please keep reading :).

_Cons:
__ Hardware support has been less successful than ISOLINUX 3.xx/4.xx.
__ Requires ldlinux.c32, originated from the same exact build.


*ISOLINUX 6.04-pre1:

_Pros:
__ Many improvements over 6.03, including better hardware support (see the changelog wiki page).
__ Current Syslinux-related packages of popular Linux distros are closer to 6.04-pre1 than to the original 6.03.

_Cons:
__ Requires ldlinux.c32, originated from the same exact build.
__ For users that would care about "final, gold, stable official upstream release", there is no 6.04 final stable official upstream release yet.


*ISOLINUX binary package from Debian "experimental" repository:

_Pros:
__ It is the most updated binary publicly released by any trustworthy organization.
__ At the time I am writing this, it includes _every-and-all_ commits/patches from upstream Syslinux.
__ The matching isohybrid MBR/tool includes patches (i.e. fixes) from upstream that were introduced just a few months ago.
__ Most binary files (including matching c32 modules) can be downloaded (and used) by anyone, even those using Windows.

_Cons:
__ Same as 6.04-pre1.
__ In case a matching SYSLINUX command line installer is needed, there is no matching "syslinux.exe" available at this time, because Debian currently does not include it in any package.


There are other ISOLINUX versions worthy of mentioning, for a variety of reasons, but I still want to keep the focus on MakeIso, so I'll leave it there (unless Erwan thinks it would be useful to expand the aforementioned, here in this forum topic).

 

About MakeIso latest version, the download link provided in the first post is always valid and pointing to latest release (hosted on my domain).
My signature also  contains links to most of my releases.


Unfortunately, that's not what I am experiencing. When I clicked on the "Download" (green) button, I get a "mkiso.zip" (not "makeiso.zip") file, still containing version 1.0.0.0, not the latest one.

#40 erwan.l

erwan.l

    Gold Member

  • Developer
  • 2278 posts
  • Location:Nantes - France
  •  
    France

Posted 02 January 2018 - 10:04 PM


Unfortunately, that's not what I am experiencing. When I clicked on the "Download" (green) button, I get a "mkiso.zip" (not "makeiso.zip") file, still containing version 1.0.0.0, not the latest one.

 

I have forced a refresh on the download link.

Should now be ok and point to this link.

 

Will process your feedback on isolinux : much appreciated.



#41 erwan.l

erwan.l

    Gold Member

  • Developer
  • 2278 posts
  • Location:Nantes - France
  •  
    France

Posted 02 January 2018 - 10:22 PM

Version 1.0.0.5 uploaded.

zip now contains Grub2 EFI floppy images
2 extra entries in grub.cfg to be able to chainload bootmgr in EFI mode


#42 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 14134 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 03 January 2018 - 09:44 AM

Now, foreseing the next possible question: I want to keep the same filename simply because all web pages, forums, etc pointing to the download URL dont have to be re edited each time.

 

You failed to foresee the next statement, however.

 

Here it is:

While you were coding MkIso/MakeIso (or slightly earlier :unsure:, but you were probably busy and didn't notice it) a breakthrough happened :w00t: , something called "folder" was invented :idea: , in a nutshell a sort of container capable of having inside both files and sub-folders, with a date and even possibly a meaningful name, with the link that never changes.

 

Examples:

http://get.geo.opera.../pub/opera/win/

https://www.kernel.o.../boot/syslinux/

 

With a structure like the above I can at a glance:

1) get a specific version, including an older one [1]

2) at a glance understand which one is the latest version

3) the downloaded file needs not to be renamed appending the actual version because it is ALREADY named correctly AND I do not risk to overwrite a previously downloaded one (with same name but a different version)

 

:duff:

Wonko

 

[1] as you well know it already happened that (talking of Clonedisk) - for whatever reasons - a newer version offered (temporarily) a poorer experience to the user and the above nice report by Ady should be enough to convince you that choice can be important for the final user.



#43 nguyentu

nguyentu

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 102 posts
  •  
    Vietnam

Posted 05 January 2018 - 12:46 AM

Your tool does not work for my USB drive.
I use Grub2, it can not boot in both UEFI and BIOS mode.
 


#44 nguyentu

nguyentu

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 102 posts
  •  
    Vietnam

Posted 05 January 2018 - 01:19 AM

Let me explain more in detail my steps.
  1. I use AIO Boot for my drive.
  2. Then I created the ISO as in the image below:
    4jTRYRD.jpg
  3. After creating an ISO file, I tested with VMware and it does not work in both UEFI and BIOS mode.
  4. I use IsoBuster to open the ISO file, the size of Microsoft.img (eltorito.img - BIOS) is incorrect, the size of Microsoft.img (efi.img - UEFI) is correct.
    BxtvicP.jpg
  5. I have extracted the Microsoft.img file (5.25 MB). Then open it with 7-Zip and it's empty.
    DuiswIO.jpg
 
If you create ISO using AIOCreator.exe -> Tools -> Create ISO, it works.
 
giMwUj0.jpg
 
TVMW9Xo.jpg


#45 erwan.l

erwan.l

    Gold Member

  • Developer
  • 2278 posts
  • Location:Nantes - France
  •  
    France

Posted 05 January 2018 - 01:27 PM

-Select ISO9660, ignore the other modes for now.

-On your EFI boot image, select boot emulation=floppy 2.88

-Ensure your EFI image is a 2.88 floppy

 

See below for a video booting in EFI mode with Grub2.

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=Q8JcOYOgeeA

 

Below the batch I use to generate Grub2 boot loaders.

Later on, I drop the EFI files into a 2.88 floppy image done with Winimage (in \efi\boot folder).

grub-mkimage.exe -o grub.img --format=i386-pc-eltorito --prefix="(cd)/boot/grub" multiboot part_msdos iso9660 biosdisk
grub-mkimage.exe -o bootia32.efi --format=i386-efi --prefix="(cd0)/boot/grub" multiboot fat part_msdos iso9660 part_gpt
grub-mkimage.exe -o bootx64.efi --format=x86_64-efi --prefix="(cd0)/boot/grub" multiboot fat part_msdos iso9660 part_gpt


#46 ady

ady

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 155 posts

Posted 05 January 2018 - 02:18 PM

Testing MakeIso 1.0.0.5:
The value for specified 'interchangeLevel' is not valid


#47 erwan.l

erwan.l

    Gold Member

  • Developer
  • 2278 posts
  • Location:Nantes - France
  •  
    France

Posted 05 January 2018 - 02:33 PM

Testing MakeIso 1.0.0.5:

The value for specified 'interchangeLevel' is not valid

 

Wierd : what OS do you have?

 

I have updated MakeIso to 1.0.0.6 (redownload).

interchangeLevel will rervert to 1 if 2 is not supported.



#48 ady

ady

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 155 posts

Posted 05 January 2018 - 04:04 PM

MakeIso 1.0.0.6 successfully created an ISO image (while the exact same test failed with v.1.0.0.5).

Opening the newly-created ISO image in Isobuster 4.1 showed that the size of the El Torito no-emulation bootloader (isolinux.bin) is incorrectly used when creating the ISO image with MakeIso 1.0.0.6. The isolinux.bin file within the ISO9660 filesystem is OK, but the size for the purpose of booting the media is truncated at 2KiB (I'm guessing, as per the default boot table size, 4 sectors of 512-bytes each).

Using the same source directory, I created an equivalent ISO image (using the same settings/options as with MakeIso 1.0.0.6 ) with a different tool. The alternative ISO image is shown in Isobuster correctly (including the El Torito no-emulation image size), and successfully boots a VM. Testing the ISO image that was created with MakeIso 1.0.0.6 in a VM fails to boot (checksum error).

This test seems to confirm that something is failing in MakeIso's calculation of the El Torito image size.



#49 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 14134 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 05 January 2018 - 04:24 PM

Below the batch I use to generate Grub2 boot loaders.

Later on, I drop the EFI files into a 2.88 floppy image done with Winimage (in \efi\boot folder).







grub-mkimage.exe -o grub.img --format=i386-pc-eltorito --prefix="(cd)/boot/grub" multiboot part_msdos iso9660 biosdisk
grub-mkimage.exe -o bootia32.efi --format=i386-efi --prefix="(cd0)/boot/grub" multiboot fat part_msdos iso9660 part_gpt
grub-mkimage.exe -o bootx64.efi --format=x86_64-efi --prefix="(cd0)/boot/grub" multiboot fat part_msdos iso9660 part_gpt

Why?

I mean, you could continue the batch (and use one of your tools or *any* other means) to create and populate the floppy image.

 

As an example, Gilles Vollant's Freeware Extract can do it:

http://www.winimage.com/extract.htm

*like*:





EXTRACT -i efiboot.img bootia32.efi -F288

or mtools:

http://reboot.pro/fi...ile/267-mtools/

 

Also, as hinted previously, the fact that the good MS guys use a 2.88 sized floppy it doesn't mean that such a size is actually needed.

 

Given that the built GRUB2 bootia32.efi and/or bootx64.efi are smaller, a 1.44 and possibly even a 1.2 or even smaller filesystem would be enough (to be tested).

 

 

 

I have updated MakeIso to 1.0.0.6 (redownload).

 

No, you haven't (or for whatever reason the board did not refresh, this:

http://reboot.pro/fi...le/582-makeiso/

is still 1.0.0.5

 

@Ady

From what you report (actually from what I understand of your report), the 2 Kb size is correct and same as mkisofs -boot-load-size 4 (that is the whole point of boot info table).

As said earlier (at length) the point is all about compatibility with some (nowadays "older") systems/BIOSes that "assume" that the no-emulation boot image is 2 Kb.

It is normally a choice with mkisofs, the -boot-load-size 4 (and thus the use of boot info table) hopefully assures booting on a wider range of systems.

 

 

:duff:

Wonko



#50 erwan.l

erwan.l

    Gold Member

  • Developer
  • 2278 posts
  • Location:Nantes - France
  •  
    France

Posted 05 January 2018 - 04:31 PM

Would you be able to run iso_info (in previous post) against your iso?

 

The virtual sector count will be 4 sectors (-boot-load-size 4) and the boot table will contain the LBA of the file within the iso as well as the file size and a checksum of that file (starting at offset 64).

 

See a video booting isolinux here.

boot-catalog
->Validation Entry [entry #0]
platform_id:0
manufacturer:Microsoft
->Initial/Default Entry
boot_indicator:$88
boot_media_type:0
starting_sector:$00000014 (40960)
virtual_sector_count:$0004 (2048)
boot_table.bi_pvd_lba:$00000010 (32768)
boot_table.bi_file_lba:$0000002F (96256)
boot_table.bi_length:45056
boot_table.bi_csum:$3CBA9E9E





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users