boot failure after install

[feizhou at graffiti.net (Feizhou)]

alex@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Quoting Feizhou <feizhou@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> 
>> Nothing beats grub's ability to let you roam around the filesystem to 
>> find out just what kernels were installed and what their configuration 
>> parameters were and then load a kernel and its parameters on the spot.
> 
> 
> I agree that Grub is more featurefull boot loader with many nice 
> options. However, for my servers I simply want them to boot without 
> human intervention. Grub fails to do that more often than LILO.  Grub 
> needs extra work to get it
> right on my servers (that have mirrored disks).  I don't care about nice
> graphical menu (there's nobody in server room to watch it).  I don't 
> care about
> Grub's CLI (there's nobody in server room in the middle of the night to 
> use it).
> I just want system to boot every time.

Ha. Put multiple dhcp servers and tftp servers and the only thing that 
will prevent pxegrub from booting your box will be a network problem 
where the issue of whether box is up or not becomes moot. pxegrub will 
overcome any bootloader issues unless of course you have faulty RAM/NIC.
> 
> For dedicated Linux servers, LILO works perfectly, out of the box, no 
> additional
> work required.  Those boxes are simple to boot, no fancy stuff in boot 
> loader
> config files.  Grub is better when you have "complicated boot configuraion"
> box.  And "complicated boot configuration" boxes are usually desktops and
> laptops, especially those in hands of developers.

I completely disagree with you here since I use grub over pxe to 
install/boot my servers and avoid any local bootloading problems.