> > I don't know the exact definition of the term "proprietary format" but I
> > think it doesn't apply to Linux.
> When a format is _not_ well-defined (or open), I assume that it is a
> "proprietary format". Thus, in my definition, the format of vmlinux is
I didn't mean adding any code to GRUB, e.g. for supporting vmlinux without
the multiboot patch.
> > Another question is that we may want to select more precisely what
> > features we want. Purists will be happy with a mutliboot-only GRUB.
> So what?
Another option for configure as soon as the first Linux-hater requests it.
Actually, we could just write multiboot patches for free OS'es and submit
them. A good patch for linux should incorporate the multiboot header in
[b]zImage, not in vmlinux. Those patches could be maintained in the GRUB
source tree (somewhere near the documentation) until the OS guys take over