On 12/02/2013 10:28 AM, Felix Miata wrote:
Grub2 has costs:
1-consumes far more space, both where space is plentiful, and more
troubling, where space is limited
Is this really an issue for modern desktops? Maybe this is true for
embedded devices, but for them grub2 is not the biggest problematic
thing in OMV...
2-needs extensive relearning by users who deign manual management of
their own bootloader configuration
I don't believe that there are millions of users who don't trust in GUI
tools and prefer setup grub.conf manually but at the same time can't
learn new way of configuration.
3-is accompanied by dire warnings that life as we enjoy it will come
to an end if one would dare choose to install it anywhere except where
a Windows reinstallation *will* render it non-functional.
Warnings can be easily suppressed:) In any case, after Win
reinstallation you will likely have to boot from liveCD and reinstall
bootloader.
Note that from development point of view, Grub2 has at least one big
advantage - it uses os-prober to recognize other OSes that exist on
machine. Os-prober is widespread now and developed by people from many
distributions.
For old grub-legacy, drakxtools had their own set of scripts to
recognize other OSes, and I don't think that there is anybody wishing to
maintain that scripts.
Also note that technologies are constantly evolving and nowadays we have
such tricky things like UEFI. Grub2 is more helpful in providing a
smooth way of installing Linux to modern UEFI machines.
--
Denis Silakov, ROSA Laboratory.
www.rosalab.ru
