[Bug 154763] Grub is inadequate without Lilo for backup

[Chris Adams]

Once upon a time, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora at yosemite.net> said:
> On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 22:03, Rodd Clarkson wrote:
> > Of course, in all this, keep your mind open.  You might find that by
> > pointing out a specific, definable short coming of grub the developers
> > may choose to get grub up-to-snuff rather than include lilo.
> 
> Been there, done that.  As have many others on this list and elsewhere. 

No, you haven't come up with any specifics.

> Number one is lack of reliability

1. In what cases is GRUB unreliable?  Define the cases (number and types
of drives, install methods, etc.).

> followed by lack of predictability

2. In what ways is GRUB unpredictable?  Define the cases (number and
types of drives, install methods, etc.).

> which is largely a consequence of lack of documentation.

3. I have found GRUB to be well documented; "pinfo grub" has tons of
information.  Please cite specific shortcomings of the documentation.

> Experienced programmers and sysadmins report that we need Lilo for
> reliable systems.

I'm an experienced programmer and sysadmin, and I haven't touched LILO
for about 4 years.  GRUB has worked just fine for me.

> The flame kids have countered with "Works for me",

You have countered with "I prefer LILO" and flamed Red Hat and
individual people by calling names.

Until you answer numbers 1, 2, and 3 above, you have done nothing to
show that LILO is needed.  All you have done is act like a small child,
stomping his feet and yelling "I want LILO", ignoring every adult
telling you why you don't need LILO.
-- 
Chris Adams <cmadams at hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.