Re: lilo or grub as the default boot loader on i386?
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
At the moment we have two boot loaders for i386 available. Both
lilo-installer and grub-installer are available. One of them need to
be the default choice. The default choice will probably be used by
most first time installers, and will also work as a recommondation
from the Debian installation team to our users.
The previous versions of Debian used lilo, bug I am not sure why. At
this time, grub is working quite well, and it includes a few features
making it my boot loader of choice. But grub will fail with some
BIOSes and disk controllers. I guess lilo will fail with others.
Which boot loader should we make the default for i386? I suggest
making grub the default. The lilo boot loader should be included as
an option, until grub work on all the machines where lilo will work.
First seen GRUB on RedHat, worked fine, was the only bootloader that
worked on my notebook. But I'm not sure if it works everywhere. For
example on boot/root-on-software-raid I think it won't work. I like
the concept of GRUB, but LILO worked well for years and works still
fine, so I don't see why we should use GRUB by default....
regards
--
\\\ ||| /// _\=/_
( @ @ ) (o o)
+--------oOOo-(_)-oOOo--------------------------oOOo-(_)-oOOo------+
| Markus Schabel TGM - Die Schule der Technik www.tgm.ac.at |
| IT-Service A-1200 Wien, Wexstrasse 19-23 net.tgm.ac.at |
| markus.schabel@tgm.ac.at Tel.: +43(1)33126/316 |
| markus.schabel@members.fsf.org Fax.: +43(1)33126/154 |
| FSF Associate Member #597, Linux User #259595 (counter.li.org) |
| oOOo Yet Another Spam Trap: oOOo |
| ( ) oOOo yast@tgm.ac.at ( ) oOOo |
+--------\ (----( )--------------------------\ ( -----( )-----+
\_) ) / \_) ) /
(_/ (_/
Computers are like airconditioners:
They stop working properly if you open windows.
Reply to: