On Tue, 2005-12-04 at 19:46 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote: > On Tue, 2005-04-12 at 17:28 -0600, Guy Fraser wrote: > > Can we please get it back? > > <snip> > > > Can we please keep it? > > No, of course not. > > If something is wrong with app X the solution is to fix app X, not ship > an alternative to app X just because some users thinks it work better > for them. As a comparison, it's not like we ship the FreeBSD kernel just > because some users think that it has features that the Linux 2.6 kernel > doesn't. Then get the problems fixed... DUH!!! The problems is the developers keep blaming the problems on misconfiguration, when the thing should work. Although I have read the documentation for GRUB, I still have no idea why it wouldn't work no matter what files I modified and updated grub. Only fresh installs after replacing or changing a drive would work. The error number would indicate that a file could not be found, but the errors do not mention which file could not be found or on which device it was looking for the file. I would boot the Rescue CD and enter the grub console and could verify all the drives were matched in the map and could find the files that the docs said needed to be found and was able to verify that every thing in the configuration file matched. Read the archives, many people have been having exactly the same problems, and were having those problems well before LILO was completely removed. I had tried GRUB many times from when it became the default, until FC1 but it always ended up causing me grief, and I posted notes and checked Bugzilla. There have always been close to identical problems listed in Bugzilla, so I probably did not create any duplicate reports. Since nobody could help fix the problem I would just switch to LILO and cary on using the systems. On the next upgrade or re-installation I would try GRUB again, and so on and so on. The problems have never been resolved, yet someone still decided that it was to be the sole package supported for a boot loader.