Re: Are lilo and grub compatible?

["Ali Jawad" <alijawad1@gmail.com>]

Maybe using one loader as the primary loader and the other one as the
secondary loader..with one of them on the mbr and the other in the
/boot partition might work out

On 12/8/06, Andrew Sackville-West <andrew@farwestbilliards.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 11:50:59AM -0500, hendrik@topoi.pooq.com wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 06:23:35PM -0500, Jos? Alburquerque wrote:
> > > Yes, you're right about that.  GRUB can be installed in any BR (of any
> > > partition) and in that way grub and lilo *are not* mutually exclusive.
> > > But if you're planning on installing grub or lilo on the mbr then I
> > > think that they indeed are mutually exclusive.  (Am I right on this?)
> >
> > I was considering installing both grub and lilo to MBR -- but MBRs of
> > different disk drives -- Lilo to /dev/fd0, and grub to /dev/hda.
> > Then I can determine which gets used by pushing the floppy disk in or
> > out.  My question was really whether the two conflict anywhere *else*
> > but the MBR.
>
> I don't think so. as I understand it, lilo essentially hardcodes the
> location of the kernel when you write it to the BR while grub actually
> reads the file systems on booting. I know that I have booted a lilo
> system using a grub floppy. I see no reason why the reverse wouldn't work.
>
> A
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFFea1kaIeIEqwil4YRAko4AKCff/oICHOu8G35lR9GNjVTeulAzACglaFx
> 6zdRErrlThZWNxuylUwnM00=
> =pXUO
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
With Regards Ali Jawad