Public SourceMage Discussion List

["Wyatt Draggoo" <wyatt AT draggoo.com>]

> I don't agree with placing lilo in the MBR.  I never do.  I have a 
> primary booter, BootMagic from Power Quest in the MBR.  lilo has 
> problems booting multiple Linux partitions(it seems to want all the 
> kernels in one partition, /boot, and the first one it sees.  maybe a 
> bug).  Also, boot PC-DOS, Win2K, and even RedHat.

Not true at all.  Very few distros actually have a /boot partition, and one
isn't needed at all.  Lilo has no problems booting off any partition that
your BIOS can detect without any overlay software (as in, all recent
BIOSes...).  Hence the machine I had a while ago running two SMGL
incarnations, RedHat, Mandrake and SuSE, none with /boot partitions, and
all from LILO in the MBR.  I currently use a /boot partition because I've
been having xfs stability issues, so I make /boot ext2.  Also, putting a
journaling filesystem in a 32MB partition wastes more space and resources
than it does good---you don't write to /boot often enough to make a journal
worthwhile, and the journal file uses a lot of space.

> If one only uses Linux, and only one partition of Linux, lilo in the MBR 
> is AOK.
> 
> Whatever we do, we should do a very good job of explaining what is going 
> on with lilo and booting during the install.  This is a very confusing 
> issue with many people, especially newbies.  If one understands lilo, 
> linux, etc and is experienced, lilo presents no problems.

I agree about needing documentation, and I agree that lilo (or grub, for
that matter) doesn't present a problem to those who are familiar with it. 
That again is why I propose to make the default lilo install the MBR, with
those who are more familiar with it being the ones who need to go in and
change it.  Additionally, if, say, you have a SMGL install and a Windows
install, and SMGL puts lilo on the MBR and you've forgotten to add Windows,
a reboot will put you right back into the SMGL where you can fix your
lilo.conf and be on your way.  Putting lilo on your SMGL partition and
booting will put you right back into Windows, where you *can't* fix it. 
Then you go into booting your SMGL cd, mounting your partitions, chroot'ing
over to your real root, and *then* fixing lilo.  I know which one I'd
rather do. :)

Wyatt

> JohnC
> 
> Adam Clark wrote:
> 
> >Hey Wyatt,
> >
> >I agree with you on the point that I never put LILO outside of the MBR
> >either.  Maybe we should take a poll somewhere, as I'd personally like to
> >change it to disc too.
> >
> >Regarding jfs - before we even consider the alterations that would need
to
> >be done, why the jfs kick from 'ya all of a sudden?  We already have
> several
> >journalling FS options built in, with the supporting software. 
Personally,
> >I would consider getting Raid support going during install a higher
> priority
> >than adding in jfs, and even that is fairly low on the list, as I'd like
to
> >get a 'net install going very soon.  I think a lot of benefits can come
by
> >the work needed to get an okay net install done.
> >
> >But anyhow, let me know your thoughts... I like having pretty good
reasons
> >behind feature bloat.  =)
> >
> >
> >On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 15:05:52 -0800 (PST)
> >"Wyatt Draggoo" <wyatt AT draggoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >  
> >
> >>>Out of curiosity, is this option even necessary?  Ie, if, after doing
> >>>the kernel install, you go and edit lilo.conf (which the menu option
> >>>presents you with) and you put in the appropriate 'disc' instead of
> >>>'part', doesn't that re-do the MBR properly?  If it does, is this
> >>>something that should be made clearer in the install guide?
> >>>
> >>>If not, why not?
> >>>
> >>>Obviously, I'd like to try and curb this kind of problem.
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>Maybe we should find out if we should switch the default to disc instead
> >>of part.  I have *never* put LILO on anything but the MBR, and have to
> >>change it during the install every time.  If the majority of the folks
> >>installing SMGL are the same, we could change the default lilo.conf, and
> >>add a notice saying we did so to the installer.
> >>
> >>Speaking of installer, Adam, do you have any plans for 2.4.20-based
ISO? 
> >>I'd really like to be able to install on JFS, and could patch the
current
> >>install system to give that option, but I would need the 2.4.20 kernel
> >>with jfs support, and the jfsutils on the ISO...
> >>
> >>Wyatt
> >>
> >>--
> >>Wyatt Draggoo
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>SM-Discuss mailing list
> >>SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> >><a
href="http://mail.draggoo.com/jump/http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss";>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss</a>
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >  
> >

--
Wyatt Draggoo