Once upon a time, Mike Bird <mgb-fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxx> said: > > Which of the 82 Grub bugs prevents it from being used for serious work? > > 1) That basic Bugzilla queries yield 82 Grub bugs versus 15 Lilo bugs is > illustrative of their relative levels of reliability. There are hundreds (or thousands) of bugs in Bugzilla against the kernel, so it must be utter crap compared to both GRUB and LILO. That is a meaningless statistic. Weed out dupes, and then weight the count for the fact that GRUB has been the default for years now (so LILO gets minimal use and minimal bug reports). > 2) The general flakiness of Grub makes it unusable for serious work. > One simply cannot afford plane tickets (or even trouble tickets) every > time Grub fails. Lilo is much more reliable than Grub. Grub may be > appropriate for a newbie on a home PC, but Grub does not replace Lilo. Please describe the flakiness (or reference specific bugs). > 3) One of the most serious ongoing problems with Grub has been the > flakiness of the software RAID support. This isn't GRUB, this is anaconda. GRUB installs where you tell it to install, and anaconda never told GRUB to install on multiple disks. It you do it yourself (which takes a whole 5 seconds), it just works after that (since unlike LILO, GRUB doesn't have to re-install every time you change kernels or config). > 4) And this brings us again to the incredible lack of judgment > manifested by the Fedora Core team. First do no harm - if you don't > understand the issues relating to Lilo and Grub don't mess with them. You have not explained any issues. One severe limitation of LILO for production server use is that it can't do 115200 on the serial port (real servers run headless and most serial BIOS interfaces are unusable at speeds below 115200). PC serial ports have only been doing 115200 for what, 15-20 years now? -- Chris Adams <cmadams@xxxxxxxxxx> Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.