[CentOS] why was LILO removed from centOS 4.2?

[Collins Richey]

On 12/1/05, Bryan J. Smith <thebs413 at earthlink.net> wrote:

>
> I assume by "you" you meant figuratively (with reference to
> the others), as I agree that this is not something that even
> involves CentOS, hence why I'm tired of seeing the upstream
> provider decisions discussed -- and in nearly all cases --
> asking for a justification/reasoning from the CentOS
> maintainers (instead of Red Hat).
>
> > CentOS provides a rebuild of RHEL which is precisely what I
> > want right now.
>
> As I have said too, as Johnny and others have clarified will
> not change, etc...
>

I see things differently. People who run CentOS are always going to
want answers to questions that are upstream provider decisions, and
they're going to present those queries to CentOS because they're not a
part of the paying audience to discuss this with the upstream
provider. IMO, such questions are quite legitimate, and they help
others to evaluate the product (CentOS as derived from the upstream
provider base) more fully. And who, after all, has failed to gripe
when his favorite toy is withheld?

Some of these discussions get quite long-winded, but I usually learn from them.

--
Collins Richey
      Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code ... If you write
      the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not
      smart enough to debug it.
             -Brian Kernighan