Re: lilo about to be dropped?
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 11:10:25PM +0200, Iustin Pop wrote:
> 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.
Run update-initramfs -u without running lilo. Oh, you boot on the old
initramfs. Now remove the old initramfs and put some other files in
/boot. Then you're likely to not be able to boot at all. That sure is
better.
Mike
Reply to: