1 |
Michał Górny wrote: |
2 |
> Hence my question: do you find 'do not remove kernels listed |
3 |
> in bootloader config' feature useful? Do you think it should remain |
4 |
> the default? Do you think it is worthwhile to continue supporting it? |
5 |
|
6 |
I continue to use LILO because simpler and more mature code is good, |
7 |
especially in the boot code path. I used GRUB for a short while but when |
8 |
I saw it fail to boot from one start to another (without any OS changes) |
9 |
I ended that experiment. I also wasn't impressed by the GRUB2 code quality |
10 |
and tendency to become a mini-OS, trendy as that is. |
11 |
|
12 |
I don't use eclean-kernel, but FWIW I think there is clear value in |
13 |
supporting the LILO-style approach with explicit installation/configuration |
14 |
of the bootloader in advance. |
15 |
|
16 |
|
17 |
//Peter |