LILO vs LOADLIN

LILO vs LOADLIN

Post by James C. Bra » Thu, 01 Jun 1995 04:00:00



Can anyone tell me which bootup program is better?
   ie. Does LOADLIN waste memory with first loading msdos?
Thanks for your help..
 
 
 

LILO vs LOADLIN

Post by Rene Pijlma » Thu, 01 Jun 1995 04:00:00



Quote:>Can anyone tell me which bootup program is better?
>   ie. Does LOADLIN waste memory with first loading msdos?
>Thanks for your help.

James,

LILO is definitely better, because it doesn't require MS-DOS :-)

It can be rather complicated to setup LILO, however, since it has to be
written to the MBR (Master Boot Record) of the disk. I had lots of troubles
setting up LILO, and it's documentation and error messages were not very
helpfull.

I prefer to use LOADLIN, since I have DOS anyway (and I do have an excuse:
Fritz3 is just not available for Linux, and it beats gnuchess). LOADLIN
is much easier to setup. It's documentation and error messages are very
helpfull. LOADLIN is non-destructive (you don't have to write the MBR). I
use the MS-DOS boot menu in CONFIG.SYS to select a Linux kernel version.
This allows me to go back and forth between kernel versions when I'm
upgrading.

And no, LOADLIN does not waste memory. Once LOADLIN has booted the kernel,
it just disappears (and DOS with it). Linux doesn't run on top of DOS, but
instead of DOS (thank god!).

HTH,
-Ren\'e Pijlman-                      _-^^-_

                                   //   _ -  /
On no account allow a Vogon       || \  -  /\\
to read poetry at you.            ||  \___/ ||
- Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy ||       //|\
------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

1. LILO vs LOADLIN (and CD-ROM detection)

( I am using a dummy 'nospam' email address, my real one is below)
Hello!
  I have successfully installed Linux on my 486 PC!! I now would like to
boot more efficiently.

  Since I also run MS-DOS and Windows on the primary partitions, I don't
want to take any risks with my MBR on my hard-drives.  I created a LILO
boot disk for floppy drive A, but it takes too long to load. Instead, I
copied my 'vmlinuz' file to my C: drive and start my linux with LOADLIN
from DOS.

  loadlin vmlinuz root=/dev/hdb3 ro sbpcd=0x230,SoundBlaster

  My problem is that Linux seems to be ignoring my 'sbpcd' command
option.  With the /etc/rc.d/rc.cdrom file set to 'execute' permission,
the system performs a scan check for the CD-ROM but first checks 'Laser
something at 0x340' and then finally SoundBlaster. (So it takes too
long.) I want to skip the scanning process and have it go directly to
the proper CD-ROM type. I am afraid to modify the sbpcd.h file and
recompile the kernel, as the instructions are not clear enough.
  I would prefer to continue using LOADLIN with some modifications to
the command line or to use LILO (and lilo.conf) from a DOS command-line.

  What is the best way to handle this? Since the loadlin works so
quickly, does seem to offer me an advantage, since speed is my only real
issue here. Can I do this without modifying the kernel?

  Thanks in advance,
  David Diano
--
************************************************
*               Diano Consulting               *

* "When it has to be right the first time."    *
************************************************

2. fix pcmcia qlogicfas build in 2.5

3. lilo vs loadlin on fat32 boots.

4. Automating Telnet or SSH

5. lilo vs loadlin

6. hard links

7. LILO vs loadlin: clearing reserved memory?

8. Question on Functions

9. LILO vs. LOADLIN

10. LILO vs. LoadLin

11. LILO vs Loadlin

12. LILO vs. loadlin

13. Newbie: LILO vs. LOADLIN