Mageia 3 Released, Still Using Legacy GRUB

Highlighting the fact that Mageia3 uses grub 1 rather than grub 2 in the title of the article is so typical for Phoronix, they seem to lack a sense of what's important and what's not, often focussing on small unimportant details while leaving out much more important details.

I mean who cares about the boot loader as long as it does the job? Personally I actually find grub 1 a lot more user friendly to configure (not that I have to configure the boot loader often).

I wish Phoronix would become more professional in their article writing...

There are distros that still use lilo too. I've written a lot of reviews and while I always mention the bootloader(s) available I don't think I've ever been critical of a choice of bootloader.

> I don't think I've ever been critical of a choice of bootloader.

There are advantages and disadvantages to each. It largely boils down to personal preference.

GRUB 0.97 is a useful mess. GRUB 2 is an abomination, built to cater to the Debian mindset.

It's a very powerful and flexible "abomination" that works very well.

Slackware uses LILO, though a user can change to GRUB after installation. If something works for a distro, why change it? I'm sure power users can update to a new GRUB if they really want it.

There is a GRUB 0.97 package available for 32-bit Slackware x86, but not for 64-bit. Slackware 64-bit GCC doesn't like building 32-bit binaries.