On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 10:40:16AM +0100, Niall O Broin wrote:
> LILO is easier to configure, no doubt, but grub is really more
> powerful. Esp. if you're used to systems with OpenBoot firmware, grub
> is just a breath of fresh air after LILO.
I like the approach, and vastly prefer decent bootloaders with CLI's and
greater flexibility but the grub implementation falls way way short.
It's not near the same level as the FreeBSD boot loader for example,
which is doing the same job with no firmware.
> I never actually tried, I must confess, but I'd have expected that the
> issue with grub is much the same as with LILO - you need to install the
> boot record onto both disks, and have a slightly different boot entry
> for each drive, which is where unattended recovery becomes a problem.
I tried this very thing before, and when sdb is the boot disk and sda
entirely blank, grub seemed to still want to pull things from sda :/
Compare that to raid-extra-boot="/dev/sda,/dev/sdb" ;)
> claims to work, and is exactly how I'd have expected to do it.
> Additionally, I think that newer grubs might be even better, with the
> ability to try a second entry if the first fails.
Hmm, that would be better.
Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: colm+pgp at stdlib.net
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!