Re: Multiboot2 header

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 06:23:15PM +0100, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> On Tuesday 04 November 2008 21:36:27 Robert Millan wrote:
> > The Multiboot2 draft says a Multiboot2 header must be included in the OS
> > image.  However, our code assumes (in code itself and in comments) that for
> > MB2 this is optional.
> >
> > As a consequence, if you feed GRUB's multiboot loader any ELF, it will
> > attempt to load it.  I think this is very confusing for those developing
> > a Multiboot _1_ OS.  If they happen to make a mistake and put the MB1
> > header too high or unaligned, GRUB won't tell them about it but instead
> > fail in a very confusing way.
> >
> > So I assume (I'd like to!) that the correct one is the draft, and it's the
> > code that should be changed to reject executables that don't have either
> > MB1 or MB2 headers?
> 
> Yes. The code is wrong.

Okay.  The fix was fairly simple, I just checked it in.

-- 
Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."