[CentOS] why was LILO removed from centOS 4.2?
Karanbir Singh
mail-lists at karan.orgWed Nov 30 17:33:17 UTC 2005
- Previous message: [CentOS] why was LILO removed from centOS 4.2?
- Next message: [CentOS] CentOS mailserver and spam filter setup ideas & preferences
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Brian T. Brunner wrote: >>The question remains unanswered: WHY was LILO removed? > You seem to have missed the post where I highlighted the fact that it > has not been removed. > > ***Yes, the "removed" was only virtual (making it invisible unless you have > ***knowledge from elsewhere) not surgical. > >>The question was "Hey, REDHAT, *WHY*?" > > you also seem to have the wrong forum for that question, please contact > redhat at one of the following > > ***Anybody here know of a reason? Lack of arch support is often cited as a reason, although most other boot loaders one comes across ( yaboot on ppc, silo on sparc, aboot on alpha, elilo on ia64 etc ) seem to have roots in lilo. One of Grub's intentions is to have a single cross platform /multi platform boot loader ( so far it does only i386 and x86_64, which is one more than lilo ) If you are interested in the low down details, http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/ might be a place to start looking. The merits and demerits of a boot loader are, I feel, beyond the scope of this mailing list. So, on i386 grub and lilo are both avilable, other arch's have their own bootloader process / app's.
- Previous message: [CentOS] why was LILO removed from centOS 4.2?
- Next message: [CentOS] CentOS mailserver and spam filter setup ideas & preferences
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the CentOS mailing list