Re: Q: GRUB & LILO?

> >I see that GRUB is more generic, and probably better than lilo, but
> >lilo's user interface suits much more to me. (No menus, just command
> >line, it does not appear unless I want it to, ...). I patched grub a
> >bit (to make it look better), but much more should be done. I would
> >need things like safing last booted system, macros for command line
> >etc.
> >
> >Also, MultiBOOT protocol should be redone a bit ;-).
> >
> >... and maybe creating completely new MultiBOOT compliant loader
> >would be less work ...
> >
> > Pavel
>
> What would you propose in place of MultiBoot?

Well. I have not seen anything else, but I saw way how to improve
multiboot.
1) It passes some config info, but it does not tell you where config
info is, so you can not reserve area for config without walking all
those config tables
2) Also, config tables are complicated, and you can see history on
them. It would be much easier ... to create link list of detected
hardware. (Instead of having entry in structures for floppies and for
... and for ... and for ...). Current specification is limited in
32-bits somewhere, and structures are already pretty big.

> BTW, have you been able to compile grub under linux?

After minor hackery, I was. Makefiles needed to be changed. May me
personally and I'll send you my GRUB tree.

                                                                Pavel

-- 
--
This is my little buggy signature...				Pavel
GCM d? s-: !g p?:+ au- a--@ w+ v- C++@ UL+++ L++ N++ E++ W--- M- Y- R+