Michał Górny wrote:
> Hence my question: do you find 'do not remove kernels listed
> in bootloader config' feature useful?  Do you think it should remain
> the default?  Do you think it is worthwhile to continue supporting it?

I continue to use LILO because simpler and more mature code is good,
especially in the boot code path. I used GRUB for a short while but when
I saw it fail to boot from one start to another (without any OS changes)
I ended that experiment. I also wasn't impressed by the GRUB2 code quality
and tendency to become a mini-OS, trendy as that is.

I don't use eclean-kernel, but FWIW I think there is clear value in
supporting the LILO-style approach with explicit installation/configuration
of the bootloader in advance.


Reply via email to