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." _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
