William Pitcock wrote:
Hi,
I am wondering if it is a good idea to remove lilo entirely. At the
moment, lilo has been pulled from testing, and the code is in a shape
where a grave bug (bug #479607) is unlikely fixable without severe
refactoring of the codebase.
Well, grub is also not free of bugs, all my partitions are usually reiserfs
and on a hard reset grub stupidly comes up with "GRUB Error 16:
Inconsistent filesystem structure". You might see it differently, by in my
opinion this is a grave bug as well. So why not also to remove grub ;)
Sorry, I don't know if there is a debian bug report, the ubuntu bug
description is here:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/grub/+bug/64928
With grub being stable and grub2 approaching stability itself, do we
really need lilo anymore? It's not even installed by default anymore,
and the only systems I have that are still on lilo are installations of
Debian I have had since Woody.
I still use lilo on all of my systems.
It seems like moving to grub for everything may be a good choice on the
archs where lilo is used.
If we do not need lilo, then I will file a RM bug in the next couple of
weeks.
Next problem with grub, grub can't read links, but always needs to update
the menu.lst. In my previous work group we have a laptop chroot for
updates. We then rsync from this chroot to the laptops and as last step
only call 'lilo' to update to the recent kernel. For some laptops there are
exceptions, however, and not the generic kernel is installed. With simple
links and calling lilo these exceptions can be easily handled, with grubs
menu.lst this would required full parsing of that file - the script
probably would be 10x larger only for this stupid menu.lst parsing.
So I quite disagree to remove lilo.
Cheers,
Bernd