On 2013-12-02 10:47 (GMT+0400) Denis Silakov composed:
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...
Not everyone needs a "modern desktop". Many are content with old systems with small storage capacity and need only to maintain access to such evolved internet technologies as are necessary to continue email, friending, researching, shopping and banking without giving up security in the process. Not everyone has the luxury of unlimited funding to junk working hardware in order to accommodate unneeded software bloat. Not everyone needs or wants online TV or their PC playing HD movies. Certainly the environment doesn't need inducement of such waste.
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.
The issue is that for some, learning new ways is simply one cost unassociated with any benefit. Some are too busy or otherwise uninterested to learn an unasked for replacement for something that for them is not broken.
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.
But such is not a foregone conclusion. I as others can change the two partition table bits involved in moving a boot flag from partition 1 to partition 3 without any kind of special boot.With Linux configured to boot via standard MBR code in anticipation of the inevitable, the boot flag is easily moved via Windows boot, assuming the configuration does not already have Windows as the master 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.
From the self maintainers of their own bootloaders points of view, os-prober is just more bloat that is hard to figure out how to set up to have a menu as friendly as is possible with Grub Legacy. Have you ever used openSUSE's gfxboot with Grub Legacy? I've yet to find any other boot menu more appealing or usable. All one needs to modify cmdline is to type something new or BS, no need to discover and strike some trigger key to access an edit function, and each cmdline for a selected stanza is sitting right there in plain view to make it easy to confirm whether it is indeed the desired one.
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.
UEFI is supposed to dispense with the need for a bootloader in any sense Linux users are accustomed. IOW, those with UEFI systems *should* need neither Grub Legacy nor Grub2 nor Extlinux nor Gummiboot nor Lilo, etc. etc. etc.
-- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
