On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 09:00:05PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 02/16/17 15:27, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > That is obvious. Do you think that Multiboot/Multiboot2 protocols are > > substantially suboptimal? > > Yes. They push a lot of things into the bootloader for no good reason,
I have not seen anything in Multiboot(2) specs which stipulates that every bootloader must implement all features. If somebody needs minimal Multiboot(2) compatible bootloader he/she can do that. Just parse Multiboot(2) header and provide, let's call it in that way, empty boot data. Is it difficult? > thus tying the kernel's hands and making the whole boot process more > fragile. Every kernel may take from the bootloader via Multiboot(2) what it needs. No more no less. There is no requirement to use all data provided by the bootloader. > It isn't either like Grub has been very good about keeping to any spec, > their own or others. Could you be more precise? Daniel
