[arch-general] [arch-dev-public] Boot loaders in core/base

Lukáš Jirkovský l.jirkovsky at gmail.com
Sat Nov 20 16:38:41 CET 2010

On 20 November 2010 15:25, Heiko Baums <lists at baums-on-web.de> wrote:
> Am Sat, 20 Nov 2010 11:27:35 +0100
> schrieb Pierre Schmitz <pierre at archlinux.de>:
>> ATM. we have grub1 in core/base and install that by default. The
>> problem is that this project is virtually dead for a long time now and
>> also not available on x86_64. Technically it has to be in the multilib
>> repo.
> I'm running a x86_64 system and have grub1 installed without any lib32
> dependencies. So, of course it's available on x86_64. Why shall this be
> moved to [multilib]?
>> An alternative successor would be extlinux from the syslinux package.
>> It's very simple, easy to configure, actively maintained and reliable.
>> Sure, it only supports booting from ext* and btrfs afaik but to be
>> honest, if you use any other FS you should have a separate /boot even
>> when using grub.
> This would be a massive regression because there are several people who
> are using reiserfs and other filesystems.
> And what has a separate /boot partition to do with the bootloader and
> the filesystem? You can use almost every filesystem on the /boot
> partition.
> The best would be if every available bootloader would be moved to
> [core] and supported by AIF, so that the user can decide during the
> installation which bootloader fits best to him and which bootloader
> shall be installed, because there's currently no bootloader which can do
> everything. Depending on the partition scheme and the used filesystem
> a different bootloader is needed.
> And simultaneously every filesystem related package incl. btrfs-utils
> e.g. should be moved to [core] and supported by AIF, too. So that the
> user can decide during the installation how he wants to partition and
> format his drives and which filesystem he wants to use.
>> Summing up my suggestion for some time in the future would be:
>> * move extlinux/syslinux to core/base
> Good idea.
>> * move grub1 to extra/multilib and remove it from base group
> Bad idea and doesn't make much sense until there is a real equivalent
> alternative. It's still the most used bootloader I guess.
>> * keep grub2 in extra
> Should go to [core], too.
>> * maybe also move lilo to extra
> Not the best idea, too.
>> * of course keep all of them on the install cd
> Good idea again. But on the install CD there are only [core] packages
> as far as I know which makes sense. So all these packages should be
> moved to [core].
>> What do you think about this? At some point it might not be
>> sane/possible to keep grub1 as our default boot loader.
> But I don't see this point, yet. It will be sometime in  the future
> when there's a real alternative which can boot from every possible
> partition scheme and filesystem.
> Heiko

I'd keep grub legacy in core and I'd add grub 2 to core too. When grub
2 become usable enough it could replace grub legacy completely. And
for the other bootloaders: I'd scrap lilo – I don't see any reason why
to keep it in core, it's inferior compared to grub (or syslinux). I'm
not yet sure about syslinux.

More information about the arch-general mailing list