Le mardi 05 février 2013 à 10:20 +0100, Guido Berhoerster a écrit :
* Basil Chupin
[2013-02-05 07:13]: On 05/02/13 00:54, Guido Berhoerster wrote:
* Yamaban
[2013-02-04 14:10]: On Mon, 4 Feb 2013 13:54, Cristian Rodríguez
wrote: On 02/04/2013 09:19 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:
Grub2 will be used on machines that have no UEFI boot, that is. most less-than-current hardware.
It is *not* dead, it is just that grub will not be used when a dramatically simple solution like gummiboot is available. True. Basil, please show us a bootloader as simple as gummiboot for normal BIOS and you will be the hero of many.
There are many days were I would prefer LILO over Grub (1 or 2).
A question to the more knowledgeable: Would "syslinux" derivate "extlinux" [1] be able to fill this role? It already fills this role for probably 95% of all usecases*. It doesn't have extensive filesystem support (only ext4 and btrfs) but then you can use a boot partition as with grub1.
[*] notable exceptions are TPM support which I use and which is only supported by TrustedGRUB, a fork of grub1, and support for EFI, but that is already in the works for syslinux as well; so the overengineered monstrosity that is grub2 is pretty redundant and hopefully soon completely irrelevant
The best description of grub2 I have seen: "overengineered monstrosity".
But you know, all this is now *REALLY* confusing the whole picture - now there is TrustedGRUB :'( .
TrustedGRUB is a fork which adds support for a TPM and can basically verify the integrity of the system if you have the necessary hardware, I haven't looked into the details but from what I understand UEFI secure boot might be able to provide the same functionality.
No, Secure Boot is different from TPM.
--
Frederic Crozat