Re: reasons to ditch LILO before upgrading to jessie?

[Joel Roth <joelz@pobox.com>]

Stephen Powell wrote:
> As far as LILO being unmaintained is concerned, I wouldn't be too concerned
> about that.  I've been thinking about offering to maintain it myself.  I haven't
> heard from Joachim lately.  Maybe I'll drop him another line.

I think LILO is an important part of Linux infrastructure.
Please consider asking for contributions if you do take over
maintenance. 

You also mentioned elilo. This project appears to be
abandoned. 

https://sourceforge.net/projects/elilo/

Are you aware if there is much in common?

(E)LILO for GPT and UEFI would be helpful to Linux minimalists
dealing with modern hardware.

Thanks for  your LILO reference pages!

~Joel
 
> The three main things I like about LILO are (1) I understand how it works,
> (2) it is easy to configure, and (3) it doesn't use any unallocated sectors.
> 
> The main limitations to LILO's future viability, as I see it, are UEFI
> and GPT.  LILO is heavily dependent on the traditional BIOS.  Most UEFI
> systems have a CSM to provide a BIOS for forward compatibility, though it
> is often disabled by default.  But some of the newest systems are starting
> to ship with no CSM.  I won't buy one of those as long as I have a choice.
> And GPT is needed to break the 2 TiB disk size limit.  But none of my disks
> are anywhere near that big.
> 
> If your system has a BIOS and a traditional DOS-style partition table,
> there's no reason not to use LILO, unless you just don't want to.
>  
> -- 
>   .''`.     Stephen Powell    <zlinuxman@fastmail.com>
>  : :'  :
>  `. `'`
>    `-
> 

-- 
Joel Roth