Arch Linux

Nickm

Member

From: Netherlands

Registered: 2003-02-25

Posts: 106

Why lilo ??

I'd like to know why AL defaults to lilo, I have used grub quite some time now and i think it's great, it's a lot more flexible than lilo, you don't have to reinstall the bootrec everytime it just is the ideal thing for AL imho

sarah31

Member

From: Middle of Canada

Registered: 2002-08-20

Posts: 2,975

Website

Re: Why lilo ??

well having used both i would say that grub is easier for dual booting purposesbut i would not say that lilo is less flexible. lilo is indeed better than grub in certain aspects as grub is better in others.

and for the record lilo is not the default bootloasder it is the bootloader for arch. grub, a slightly older version, exists in the unofficial package tree should you wish to convert over to it.

---

AKA uknowme

I am not your friend

BluPhoenyx

Member

Registered: 2002-12-23

Posts: 239

Re: Why lilo ??

I think this is really a matter of semantics. lilo is the standard (installed with) boot loader for Arch as supplied with the distro.

As for which is better, it's really a matter of taste. Both can pretty much do what the other can except the boot time cli which grub has that lilo doesn't and simply confuses many users.

I've used both over the years and actually prefer lilo. Not because of what it does so much as what it doesn't. For example, if my kernel were to get changed somehow (never mind how) lilo won't boot it. Ain't gonna happen. Grub on the other hand will happily load the file and attempt to execute it. Ok, so I tend to be a security freak but I've worked in an MS world too long...

---

BluPhoenyx