@Suiseiseki

> I should run a proprietary bootloader that doesn't respect my freedom because it's smaller?

Who said "proprietary"? I said "smaller". GRUB is a mess. I know tb personally, I like him, but GRUB is a mess. LILO is free software, although if you modify it, your software may not be free if you do not respect the users' freedoms: is the license what is holding you back? Are you saying that would you produce non-free versions?

Per https://www.gnu.org/licenses/bsd.html :

> The two major categories of free software license are copyleft and non-copyleft. Copyleft licenses such as the GNU GPL insist that modified versions of the program must be free software as well. Non-copyleft licenses do not insist on this. We recommend copyleft, because it protects freedom for all users, but non-copylefted software can still be free software, and useful to the free software community.

If the license does not enforce it, I'll enforce it myself: the version of LILO running on my machine is a version I built from source. It is free; there may be non-free derivatives but I don't use those.

> I am absolutely certain that such internal header file is not compatible with Unix's interfaces, therefore it is nonsense to claim that was "implementing Unix interfaces".

It was not "internal" but was intended for the same purpose as the unistd.h that is now provided by glibc and other C libraries. See the release notes.

> a kernel cannot pretend to be an OS, no matter what.

I see you've never used a FORTH.