From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753693AbZHKNsL (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Aug 2009 09:48:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752585AbZHKNsK (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Aug 2009 09:48:10 -0400 Received: from bavaria.utcluj.ro ([193.226.5.35]:65203 "EHLO bavaria.utcluj.ro" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752247AbZHKNsK (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Aug 2009 09:48:10 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 4202 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2009 09:48:09 EDT Subject: [RFC] Multiboot protocol support in vmlinux? From: Cristi Magherusan To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-ff9LW98KudoGMExCFPhV" Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 10:12:29 +0300 Message-Id: <1249974749.3640.11.camel@ufo> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --=-ff9LW98KudoGMExCFPhV Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, Have you considered (optionally) supporting multiboot in the future, directly in the ELF vmlinux image (not in bzImage as it is now)? What would be the pros and cons of the current implementation as compared to multiboot-compatible ELF from your point of view? Thanks, Cristi M. --=20 Ing. Cristi M=C4=83gheru=C8=99an, System/Network Engineer Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, Romania http://cc.utcluj.ro +40264 401247 --=-ff9LW98KudoGMExCFPhV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkqBGdgACgkQfwrBISYVZFWpQQCcDnbbeMB4l4+0XWvq2ogeJ2fv PJMAniZRHJEVHqs7JfYuwVkcAn66puj6 =9gRQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-ff9LW98KudoGMExCFPhV--