Re: Stable Debian == obsolete??
On ?, 2003-11-10 at 19:49, Rob VanFleet wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 06:31:46PM -0600, Chema wrote:
> > On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 21:01:49 +1100
> > Rob Weir <rweir@ertius.org> wrote:
> >
> > RW> > When I got to the boot loader options, I was surprised to find
> > RW> > only lilo.
> > RW>
> > RW> You need a default bootloader during the install. lilo works. If
> > RW> you don't like it, change it after the install.
> > RW>
> > RW> > I was installing to /dev/hda9, guess in wich Gb is that!!
> > [...]
> > RW> Do you mean "grub"? What benefits does grub have over lilo for the
> > RW> initial boot of Debian?
> > RW>
> >
> > Lilo can't boot from any place after the 2Gb, at least it couldn't the
> > last time I used it, about a year and a half ago. I don't know if
> > they fixed it by now (don't think so), but most surely Woody's lilo
> > can't do it.
>
> Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but I just recently installed stable
> onto a 10 gig partition that was at the end of a 40 gig drive. lilo
> worked fine.
>
> Rob
>
Just thought about it.
You have an option to install lilo into the mbr or the local partition.
I belive that if you install it into the mbr it should work fine (does
on the end of my 30G disk).
Don't know about the partion itself, IIRC the location is a bios
limitation and not lilo's.
Reply to: