FC4t2 no good without LILO

[Guy Fraser]

On Wed, 2005-13-04 at 08:26 -0400, William Hooper wrote:
> Res said:
> [snip]
> >> You're missing a huge part of the picture. Having lilo the package
> >> (even
> >> though as you note, it's not really maintained) might not be much, but
> >> it requires a lot of complicated kludgy infrastructure in the installer,
> >> and in mkinitrd, etc., and makes kernel updates very fragile.
> >
> > what utter crap! we always build our own kernels using the std makefile
> > and the source from kernel.org, if you can compile a kernel then ur done
> > either way, nothing else to do
> 
> So you always compile your own vanilla kernels instead of using the Core
> provided ones.  Despite that, you somehow find installing a non-Core
> provided boot loader an huge burden?

It is easier to replace a kernel on a machine that will boot, 
than to replace a boot loader on a machine that won't.