Subject: Re: Relevance of IS09660 apple extensions for makefs
To: None <tech-kern@NetBSD.org>
From: David Young <dyoung@pobox.com>
List: tech-kern
Date: 07/12/2007 15:27:49
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 02:31:51PM -0400, Richy Kim wrote:
> >   IIRC, mac68k and macppc are not yet switched over to use makefs
> > rather than mkisofs (from pkgsrc), since they rely on hybrid
> > (HFS+ISO9660) and Apple Extension support, respectively.  The
> > makefiles using mkisofs do use these features now.
> 
> So stepping back, the larger motivation is to have an "in-base" mkisofs
> equivalent?
> 
> >From what I understand, Open Firmware 3 and up which is essentialy every
> modern mac within the last few years, requires hybrid (HFS+/ISO9660) to
> automatically boot. So apple extensions alone on makefs would be short.

ISO9660 + Apple Extensions may be useful enough in its own right that
we should add it, and it will be easiest, besides.  If it does not get
us near to booting, I guess that one may as well start writing an HFS
option for makefs.

> I haven't found any literature on mac68k to confirm if pure iso9660 with
> apple extensions would suffice for boot.

Neither have I.  I suppose it is possible that mac68k needs a HFS/ISO9660
hybrid, also.

Dave

-- 
David Young             OJC Technologies
dyoung@ojctech.com      Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933 ext 24