On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 07:26:57 -1000
Joel Roth <joelz@???> wrote:

> Steve Litt wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:20:10 +0100
> > Adam Borowski <kilobyte@???> wrote:
> >

> > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:02:17AM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:  
> > > > Grub is the systemd of bootloaders. It's all about pretty
> > > > colors, nice images, and hiding the fact that processes are
> > > > being instantiated.    

> > >
> > > Grub is complex, but that's caused by what it tries to do (read
> > > the kernel image from real filesystems instead of a blockmap like
> > > lilo). It doesn't go beyond its scope, unlike systemd.
> >
> > The preceding paragraph was much more true of Grub1 than its
> > gargantuan spawn, Grub2.
> >
> > Grub1 read filesystems just fine. Grub2 has prioritized all sorts of
> > pretty, and the simplicity of Grub1 has been lost.
>
> The grub developers wrote that they began grub2 due
> to limitations and maintenance problems with grub1.

The preceding sentence is almost exactly my point. The systemd
developers wrote that they began systemd due to the limitations and
maintenance problems with sysvinit.

No doubt in my mind that at some point sysvinit must go on the
scrapheap of history, and I wouldn't argue that old Grub must go there
too. But the replacement ought not to be worse than the old clunker
it's replacing.

SteveT

Steve Litt
January 2016 featured book: Twenty Eight Tales of Troubleshooting
http://www.troubleshooters.com/28