▲ 88 ▼ Ubuntu 26.10 Looks To Strip Its GRUB Bootloader To The Bare Minimum For Better Security (www.phoronix.com) submitted 7 months ago by cm0002@literature.cafe to c/linux@programming.dev 30 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 16 points 7 months ago (8 children) Alternate title: Ubuntu hasn't discovered LILO. permalink fedilink source hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 28 points 7 months ago (5 children) It’s probably easier to strip down GRUB, than it is to resurrect and add missing features to a project that has been dead for 10+ years permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 2 points 7 months ago* (4 children) It's default for Slackware so i'd hardly call it dead. And i doubt it's easier to strip a behemoth than it is to add features to a small code-base. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children) I guess they have their own fork of it? Upstream hasn’t seen a new release, nor any commits, since 2015: https://lilo.joonet.de/ ETA: It is also my understanding that LILO fundamentally does not support reading filesystems, while Canonical want to keep SquashFS, among others. Adding support for that to LILO, along with whatever other features are missing, would likely be a major undertaking permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 point 7 months ago (2 children) I guess they have their own fork of it? Upstream hasn’t seen a new release, nor any commits, since 2015: https://lilo.joonet.de/ Perhaps. Has lilo needed any changes, though? If it hasn't, then no commits and no feature creep. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago (1 child) Development stopped not because LILO didn’t need any changes, but because of its limitations (source): NOTE: I have finished development of LILO at December 2015 because of some limitations (e.g. with BTFS, GPT, RAID). If someone want to develop this nice software further, please let me know ... Also, I dunno what your position is on this, but it is amusing to see calls for Canonical to replace GPL licensed software, with something with a more lenient license (BSD-3-clause). Normally that would cause outrage around here permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 point 7 months ago I recall something about LILO nor supporting RAID when i tried it a few years ago. but it is amusing to see calls for Canonical to replace GPL licensed software, Par for the course with Canonical™, much like all the rust rewrites. permalink fedilink source parent [–] dgriffith@aussie.zone 6 points 7 months ago* You mean LI Not shown: user staring at a screen that is blank except for those two characters permalink fedilink source parent [–] kilgore_trout@feddit.it 1 point 7 months ago There are alternatives to LILO nowadays. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 28 points 7 months ago (5 children) It’s probably easier to strip down GRUB, than it is to resurrect and add missing features to a project that has been dead for 10+ years permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 2 points 7 months ago* (4 children) It's default for Slackware so i'd hardly call it dead. And i doubt it's easier to strip a behemoth than it is to add features to a small code-base. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children) I guess they have their own fork of it? Upstream hasn’t seen a new release, nor any commits, since 2015: https://lilo.joonet.de/ ETA: It is also my understanding that LILO fundamentally does not support reading filesystems, while Canonical want to keep SquashFS, among others. Adding support for that to LILO, along with whatever other features are missing, would likely be a major undertaking permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 point 7 months ago (2 children) I guess they have their own fork of it? Upstream hasn’t seen a new release, nor any commits, since 2015: https://lilo.joonet.de/ Perhaps. Has lilo needed any changes, though? If it hasn't, then no commits and no feature creep. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago (1 child) Development stopped not because LILO didn’t need any changes, but because of its limitations (source): NOTE: I have finished development of LILO at December 2015 because of some limitations (e.g. with BTFS, GPT, RAID). If someone want to develop this nice software further, please let me know ... Also, I dunno what your position is on this, but it is amusing to see calls for Canonical to replace GPL licensed software, with something with a more lenient license (BSD-3-clause). Normally that would cause outrage around here permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 point 7 months ago I recall something about LILO nor supporting RAID when i tried it a few years ago. but it is amusing to see calls for Canonical to replace GPL licensed software, Par for the course with Canonical™, much like all the rust rewrites. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 2 points 7 months ago* (4 children) It's default for Slackware so i'd hardly call it dead. And i doubt it's easier to strip a behemoth than it is to add features to a small code-base. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children) I guess they have their own fork of it? Upstream hasn’t seen a new release, nor any commits, since 2015: https://lilo.joonet.de/ ETA: It is also my understanding that LILO fundamentally does not support reading filesystems, while Canonical want to keep SquashFS, among others. Adding support for that to LILO, along with whatever other features are missing, would likely be a major undertaking permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 point 7 months ago (2 children) I guess they have their own fork of it? Upstream hasn’t seen a new release, nor any commits, since 2015: https://lilo.joonet.de/ Perhaps. Has lilo needed any changes, though? If it hasn't, then no commits and no feature creep. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago (1 child) Development stopped not because LILO didn’t need any changes, but because of its limitations (source): NOTE: I have finished development of LILO at December 2015 because of some limitations (e.g. with BTFS, GPT, RAID). If someone want to develop this nice software further, please let me know ... Also, I dunno what your position is on this, but it is amusing to see calls for Canonical to replace GPL licensed software, with something with a more lenient license (BSD-3-clause). Normally that would cause outrage around here permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 point 7 months ago I recall something about LILO nor supporting RAID when i tried it a few years ago. but it is amusing to see calls for Canonical to replace GPL licensed software, Par for the course with Canonical™, much like all the rust rewrites. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children) I guess they have their own fork of it? Upstream hasn’t seen a new release, nor any commits, since 2015: https://lilo.joonet.de/ ETA: It is also my understanding that LILO fundamentally does not support reading filesystems, while Canonical want to keep SquashFS, among others. Adding support for that to LILO, along with whatever other features are missing, would likely be a major undertaking permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 point 7 months ago (2 children) I guess they have their own fork of it? Upstream hasn’t seen a new release, nor any commits, since 2015: https://lilo.joonet.de/ Perhaps. Has lilo needed any changes, though? If it hasn't, then no commits and no feature creep. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago (1 child) Development stopped not because LILO didn’t need any changes, but because of its limitations (source): NOTE: I have finished development of LILO at December 2015 because of some limitations (e.g. with BTFS, GPT, RAID). If someone want to develop this nice software further, please let me know ... Also, I dunno what your position is on this, but it is amusing to see calls for Canonical to replace GPL licensed software, with something with a more lenient license (BSD-3-clause). Normally that would cause outrage around here permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 point 7 months ago I recall something about LILO nor supporting RAID when i tried it a few years ago. but it is amusing to see calls for Canonical to replace GPL licensed software, Par for the course with Canonical™, much like all the rust rewrites. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 point 7 months ago (2 children) I guess they have their own fork of it? Upstream hasn’t seen a new release, nor any commits, since 2015: https://lilo.joonet.de/ Perhaps. Has lilo needed any changes, though? If it hasn't, then no commits and no feature creep. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago (1 child) Development stopped not because LILO didn’t need any changes, but because of its limitations (source): NOTE: I have finished development of LILO at December 2015 because of some limitations (e.g. with BTFS, GPT, RAID). If someone want to develop this nice software further, please let me know ... Also, I dunno what your position is on this, but it is amusing to see calls for Canonical to replace GPL licensed software, with something with a more lenient license (BSD-3-clause). Normally that would cause outrage around here permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 point 7 months ago I recall something about LILO nor supporting RAID when i tried it a few years ago. but it is amusing to see calls for Canonical to replace GPL licensed software, Par for the course with Canonical™, much like all the rust rewrites. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago (1 child) Development stopped not because LILO didn’t need any changes, but because of its limitations (source): NOTE: I have finished development of LILO at December 2015 because of some limitations (e.g. with BTFS, GPT, RAID). If someone want to develop this nice software further, please let me know ... Also, I dunno what your position is on this, but it is amusing to see calls for Canonical to replace GPL licensed software, with something with a more lenient license (BSD-3-clause). Normally that would cause outrage around here permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 point 7 months ago I recall something about LILO nor supporting RAID when i tried it a few years ago. but it is amusing to see calls for Canonical to replace GPL licensed software, Par for the course with Canonical™, much like all the rust rewrites. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 point 7 months ago I recall something about LILO nor supporting RAID when i tried it a few years ago. but it is amusing to see calls for Canonical to replace GPL licensed software, Par for the course with Canonical™, much like all the rust rewrites. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dgriffith@aussie.zone 6 points 7 months ago* You mean LI Not shown: user staring at a screen that is blank except for those two characters permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kilgore_trout@feddit.it 1 point 7 months ago There are alternatives to LILO nowadays. permalink fedilink source parent