| 1 |
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 2:27 AM, Frank Peters <frank.peters@×××××××.net> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, 9 Dec 2010 11:58:36 +0000 |
| 3 |
> "Paul Jewell" <paul@×××××.org> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> When I installed my system back in January, I started off with 64 bit |
| 6 |
>> only, and immediately hit a problem with grub compilation. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Why not just use lilo? Lilo doesn't need the kernel to boot the |
| 9 |
> system and it compiles on pure 64-bit systems. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> I hate to proselytize, but it seems to me that grub has been pushed |
| 12 |
> into the Linux world without merit. Lilo does the job just as well. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
What's the advantage of LILO nowadays? I used grub because of two |
| 15 |
reasons: 1) I don't need to re-install the MBR when changing grub's |
| 16 |
.conf file and 2) I can edit configuration at boot time, useful when |
| 17 |
you messed up your grub.conf. Last time I checked (admittedly long |
| 18 |
time ago) LILO cannot do both of these. Granted, I've never used LILO, |
| 19 |
does it boot faster or runs on more platforms or is there any |
| 20 |
particular reason why you used it? |
Archives