Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 15 of 15
Originally Posted by Dachnaz The first bootloader I ever got my hands dirty in was GRUB. I've had great success with it. It seemed easier to configure than Lilo, as ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #11
    Linux Newbie
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    186

    Quote Originally Posted by Dachnaz
    The first bootloader I ever got my hands dirty in was GRUB. I've had great success with it. It seemed easier to configure than Lilo, as IMO the language it uses in the grub.conf file is more understandable. I haven't even had to try twice to set up dual-boot. The first time it worked perfectly. It really is a matter of personal opinion, though.
    I agree with you 100%.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cabhan
    As has been said, it really is personal opinion. I notice that those who first experience LILO tend to prefer it, while those who began with GRUB use that now.
    Please allow me to disagree... The first bootloader I used was LILO and I couldn't understand anything regarding how it works or how to configure it. When I tried GRUB I found it unbelivably easy to configure.

    As stated before: this is absolutely a matter of taste... it doesn't matter which was first, which one you tried first, etc... Some like GRUB, some like LILO. And a new user should probably try them both to see which one he finds it easier to handle.
    You can only be young once. But you can always be immature.

  2. #12
    Linux Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    542
    Again, this is purely personal preference, but I prefer LILO myself. The configuration file is much easier to deal with and it does inform you of errors in the file. Unfortunatly, in most distros I do not have the luxury of LILO as most of them go for GRUB instead.

  3. #13
    Linux Guru budman7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Knee deep in Grand Rapids, Michigan
    Posts
    3,242
    Quote Originally Posted by chopin1810
    Again, this is purely personal preference, but I prefer LILO myself. The configuration file is much easier to deal with and it does inform you of errors in the file. Unfortunatly, in most distros I do not have the luxury of LILO as most of them go for GRUB instead.
    In my experience most distros use grub by default, but still make lilo available, you just have to look for it.
    How to know if you are a geek.
    when you respond to "get a life!" with "what's the URL?"
    - Birger

    New users read The FAQ

  4. #14
    Linux Newbie eerok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    153
    I like grub because I've only needed to install it once, even after doing a survey of many distros over several months.

    I use a 32 MB /boot partition that all the distros have used, with the same grub stuff on it, reconfigured with a text editor as required. This works great as long as I remember to clear off the obsolete kernels from time to time.

    Can't get more simple and flexible than that.

    --
    noobus in perpetuum

  5. #15
    Linux Guru techieMoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    9,496
    I'm going to go ahead and lock this thread because it could easily go on forever between the "I personally like LILO" and "I personally like GRUB" posts. The bottom line is this: it's personal preference. Some like LILO, some like GRUB. They do the same things. Both are configurable. Both are pretty "standard" regardless of what distribution you choose.
    Registered Linux user #270181
    TechieMoe's Tech Rants

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •