That is true. However I'm not sure how easily that field can be
modified. Would we need a custom tool for that? Could it be done with a
linker script? We are talking specifically about ELF here, so it might
make more sense to require a PT_NOTE segment.
I'm not sure I agree with Okuji though. If th
No, I think Okuji mentioned that he didn't want to omit the Multiboot
header out of the possibility of not registering the Multiboot
header's presence if it is past the 8K mark (i.e. corrupt multiboot
kernel).
With a custom e_type you could be sure it's really a Multiboot kernel
or not...
On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 15:27 -0600, Andrei E. Warkentin wrote:
> How about having a custom e_type for ELF images booted by GRUB?
> Something in the range between ET_LOOS and ET_HIOS (the OS specific
> types). This way one could avoid the Multiboot header in ELF, as the
> file would itself would iden
How about having a custom e_type for ELF images booted by GRUB?
Something in the range between ET_LOOS and ET_HIOS (the OS specific
types). This way one could avoid the Multiboot header in ELF, as the
file would itself would identify self as GRUB-bootable or not.
Also...
I am not familiar w
One requirement listed for multiboot2 was that ELF headers should be
ignored, because NetBSD was setting their ELF addresses incorrectly.
This has now been fixed (see
http://www.netbsd.org/cgi-bin/query-pr-single.pl?number=32865), so I've
removed that requirement.
ELF headers tell you where to loa
