On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 11:02 -0700, Mike Bird wrote: > The relevance is that Redhat's excuse for replacing an essential tool > (Lilo) with an unreliable/inadequate/undocumented/defunct tool (Grub > Legacy) was that Lilo cost too much to support. Redhat is putting a lot > of work into Eclipse - a product that few will need or use. A tiny > fraction of the Eclipse effort would suffice to retain Lilo in Core. Just because you don't use Eclipse, doesn't mean a few will need or use. Same difference with the lilo vs. grub issue Is there an Eclipse equivalent in Core? No Is there a LILO equivalent in Core? Yes. Its' called GRUB > We've shown that Redhat has not supported Lilo in years - Lilo just > works. Pretty much all that Redhat needs to do is leave it alone and > let it be built and distributed automatically. Why? So that more bugs can get filed on it, and the poor maintainer has to look at code that even upstream finds almost dead/useless? This thread is getting far non-productive, and as Alan said, you're free to package lilo into Extras. -- Colin Charles, byte@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.bytebot.net/ "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mohandas Gandhi