Re: lilo about to be dropped?
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 11:42:42AM -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 18:19 +0200, Vincent Zweije wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 06:06:38PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> >
> > || On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 08:02:04PM +0400, Dmitry E. Oboukhov <unera@debian.org> wrote:
> >
> > || > I use lilo, I like lilo.
> > || > I don't like grub because it has unlogically config, unlogically
> > || > behavior, strange reconfig-system. I don't like the programs with
> > || > perverse intellect. Grub is not unixway.
> > ||
> > || Which is more perverse to read a kernel?
> > || - reading actual files from actual filesystems
> > || - reading hardcoded blocks on the device
> >
> > I think this question should be:
> >
> > Which is more perverse to read without a kernel?
> >
> > The answer could still fall either way.
>
> No, the answer is always the second one.
Err, why? I've seen grub failing more often, and heard way more report
of this, than of lilo. Please explain why you say so.
The grub installer also used to read the blockdevice while the
filesystem was mounted, which is never the right answer. It has always
seemed hackish to me, duplicating fs functionality (and not always
correctly, e.g. related to journal replaying on ext3/xfs).
A simple block list is just that.
iustin
Reply to: