From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1KKynN-0003ei-HV for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:03:33 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KKynL-0003eD-MC for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:03:31 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KKynK-0003dh-5k for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:03:31 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=53087 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KKynJ-0003dc-T6 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:03:29 -0400 Received: from c60.cesmail.net ([216.154.195.49]:54520) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KKynJ-0003zn-6O for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:03:29 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO relay.cesmail.net) ([192.168.1.81]) by c60.cesmail.net with ESMTP; 21 Jul 2008 13:03:27 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.21] (static-72-92-88-10.phlapa.fios.verizon.net [72.92.88.10]) by relay.cesmail.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 472DA618F22 for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:03:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Pavel Roskin To: The development of GRUB 2 In-Reply-To: <1216659036.3033.10.camel@localhost> References: <4883A568.10709@t-online.de> <1KKshv-1kdy2C0@fwd33.aul.t-online.de> <1216638178.8334.153.camel@localhost> <1216655461.3460.28.camel@dv> <1216659036.3033.10.camel@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:03:26 -0400 Message-Id: <1216659806.3460.61.camel@dv> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 (2.22.3.1-1.fc9) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. Subject: Re: [PATCH] Kernel fixes for Cygwin X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:03:32 -0000 On Mon, 2008-07-21 at 18:50 +0200, Javier Martín wrote: > Of course, another way to go could be to allow the bootloader part of > GRUB to be built in PE format: it would "just" be a matter of writing > the PE counterparts to kern/elf.c and abstracting kern/dl.c "a > bit" (i.e. a lot of work). The downside to this, apart from the > unspecified work required, is that Windows-built i386-pc-pe modules are > no longer compatible with Linux-built i386-pc-elf. Not a showstopper, > but might require a sober thinking. As I have a lot of free time right > now, I'll try to think whether it's possible or not. I think it's important to have a consistent format for modules. > > Maybe we could treat ELF header like a multiboot header? That means > > that we write the header fields in the assembly language, substitute the > > necessary variables and ask objcopy to make a raw binary that would > > actually be an ELF file? > As far as I understand the ELF format, this would be too complex to get > right: there's a lot of info in there. If ELF is too complex to write manually, we can use another format everywhere. It could be something GRUB specific. But I think we should try to use ELF, as it's widespread and extensible. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin