why was LILO removed from centOS 4.2?

[kerplop at sbcglobal.net (Robert)]

Preston Crawford wrote:

>On Thu, 2005-12-01 at 12:54 -0500, Bryan J. Smith wrote:
>  
>
>>Let's get the reality straight, these are upstream provider defaults and
>>they aren't going to change for that reason -- at least not in the stock
>>CentOS distribution.  So why do we see the bitching for the impossible?
>>    
>>
>
>Better question... why would you even WANT to complain? I don't get it
>either.
>
Really!

[rj@mavis pop]$ grep "why was LILO removed from centOS 4.2?" ./CentOS | 
wc -l
54
[rj@mavis pop]$                

It would be interesting to know how many posts giving help for real 
problems -- indeed, how many calls for help on bugs, procedures, 
packages, etc -- have been lost in that pile of drivel.   The "why, why, 
why" reminds me so much of my great-grandson.... before his 5th birthday.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20051202/ef0584fd/attachment.htm