Re: Is it a "user error" to use lilo?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 09:07:29AM -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
>On Wed, 2008-08-27 at 15:41 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>>
>> Harrasing LILO users by silencing bugreports about problems[2] using
>> it is the wrong approach. If LILO is officially unsupported by
>> Debian (not only by kernel team and/or initramfs-tools maintainer) we
>> should drop that package from the archive!
>
>I am LILO's maintainer. It is hardly unsupported, infact it is
>supported better now than it has been in a long time.
great to hear that (and no, I was unware that you were its maintainer)!
>The initramfs-tools maintainer does not support any bootloader. It is
>not their place to support any bootloaders.
I agree (I maintain an alternate ramdisk generator, yaird), but there
seems to be different opinions on that:
jonas@auryn:~$ grep -n lilo /usr/sbin/update-initramfs
175:# lilo call
176:run_lilo()
178: # show lilo errors on failure
179: if ! lilo -t > /dev/null 2>&1 ; then
180: echo "ERROR lilo fails for new ${initramfs}:"
182: lilo -t
184: lilo
187:# check if lilo is on mbr
200: # check out lilo.conf for validity
201: boot=$(awk -F = '/^boot=/{ print $2}' /etc/lilo.conf)
221: && run_lilo && return 0
225: echo "WARNING: grub and lilo installed."
227: echo "If you use lilo as bootloader you must run lilo!"
234: # if both lilo and grub around, figure out if lilo needs to be run
237: if [ -e /etc/lilo.conf ] && [ -x /sbin/lilo ]; then
242: run_lilo
254: if [ -r /etc/lilo.conf ] && [ -x /sbin/lilo ]; then
255: run_lilo
258: if [ -x /sbin/elilo ]; then
259: elilo
>I think it is absurd that you claim you are being silenced when you are
>not.
I am not. I was referring to bugreports, not myself.
(To be exact, Max has actually kindly asked me to keep silent about
kernel and initramfs-tools bugs, but that is _not_ the issue raised
here!)
>If you have both GRUB and LILO installed, there will be problems. That
>is infact, a bug. They should Conflict with each other to ensure that
>only one can be installed at a time, but it is a minor bug at best, as
>any smart user would not have both bootloaders installed. And infact,
>any typical user would not install a second bootloader.
I agree that it is highly unusual to activate multiple bootloaders
concurrently. But not to install multiple bootloader _packages_.
I would want both to be supported. but sure, that is up to you
bootloader package maintainers.
I consider it wrong to close bugreports filed against initramfs-tools
when (partly) belonging to lilo. But sure, if you as lilo maintainer is
happy with that, I rest my case.
- Jonas
- --
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAki1aSEACgkQn7DbMsAkQLhRLACbBBvGWgfu1pAMVihbSrsJacSv
0noAmgPO/o06dsVvbg8cYtk3AX/n0Gpw
=GGWp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: