Re: multiboot2: make multiboot header optional

[Hollis Blanchard]

On Sat, 2006-12-02 at 18:27 +0100, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> 
> Reversely, I ask you a question. What is the real advantage in using
> tags in a Multiboot header?
> 
> From my point of view, it is not necessarily very extensible or
> flexible, as our experience shows that changes to the Multiboot header
> are rarely demanded (so far, only once, IIRC).

It should be pretty clear that 32 bits are a finite number, and tags are
unlimited. In fact it's worse than that, since the bit partitioning
means we have far fewer available bits for any particular flag.

The bit numbering is also confusing, especially the partitioning of
meanings (this is required, this is requested, this is arch-specific,
this isn't).

Finally, using flags for some things and tags for others is
inconsistent.

The extensibility argument alone is enough to seal it for me, especially
since the code can be written in such an error-free manner, as I've
demonstrated.

-Hollis