In one sentence, grub is poorly documented, over complicated pants, and
lilo ROCKS...
Feizhou wrote:
> 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.
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
