[SOLVED]LILO for grub?

deleted0 · 2016-01-07 21:25:25

Inodoro Pereyra wrote:

YES!!! It is working!
Thank you HoaS, thank you all!
You guys are unbelievable!

Whoo Hoo!! Thanks for letting us know.

8bit

ohnonot · 2016-01-08 07:31:28

Snap wrote:

Lilo development is dead. Still in Jessie, but no longer developed.

sorry, but unless this happened very recently, it is not true:
https://alioth.debian.org/projects/lilo/

ohnonot · 2016-01-08 07:49:08

IP, good you got it fixed!
however...
now, instead of using the magic of what grub is able to do (and why it is so bloated), you're doing (almost) everything manually?

Inodoro Pereyra wrote:

every time I install Debian or a Debian based distro (had the same problem with BunsenLabs), when I go to Viperr, I find my wireless is missing. No problem: I open Viperr on an old kernel, and the problem gets fixed.
But then, when I updated grub, it didn't detect Fedora23. So I reinstalled grub, and updated it again, and now it only recognized Viperr and Windows 7!!!

just some thougths about this (this was the core of the problem, right?) - what i would have tried first:

find a permanent solution for the wireless problem in viper and uninstall the newer kernels. because otherwise i think os-prober will always opt for the newer kernel? or maybe that, too, can be adjusted inside the affected distro, most probably in /etc/default/grub?
boot into each distro one by one (i know, you can't, but this can be fixed temporarily by editing grub), make a grub-install, and see if ti recognizes all. if so, stick with that one as your grub provider.

Inodoro Pereyra · 2016-01-08 17:35:12

ohnonot wrote:

just some thougths about this (this was the core of the problem, right?) - what i would have tried first:
find a permanent solution for the wireless problem in viper and uninstall the newer kernels. because otherwise i think os-prober will always opt for the newer kernel? or maybe that, too, can be adjusted inside the affected distro, most probably in /etc/default/grub?
boot into each distro one by one (i know, you can't, but this can be fixed temporarily by editing grub), make a grub-install, and see if ti recognizes all. if so, stick with that one as your grub provider.

Thank you Ohnonot.
That goes to show at least one difference between you and me: you know what you're doing, I don't. :8

Seriously though, I would LOVE to find a permanent solution for the endless problem between Debian and my wireless. As far as I can tell, it all has to do with the fact that the wireless uses a non-free driver. In any case, I don't know why the Viperr driver gets erased, nor why it only happens with Debian (I had installed -or almost installed- more than a dozen other distros in the past, and never had a problem), but the fact is it does happen. In any case, it's easy to solve, when it happens.

About grub, I always use the one in Viperr, because I already have it personalized to my taste, and it makes no sense to me to have to do the same again, when that one is working (especially after editing the /etc/grub/40_custom file) just fine.

ohnonot · 2016-01-09 09:29:12

Inodoro Pereyra wrote:

Seriously though, I would LOVE to find a permanent solution for the endless problem between Debian and my wireless.

did you already have a thread about this?
maybe we can look at it again, and decide whether it is better to

make the kernel downgrade permanent, so that subsequent apt-get upgrades respect it
or, permanently fix your wireless driver problem

About grub, I always use the one in Viperr, because I already have it personalized to my taste, and it makes no sense to me to have to do the same again, when that one is working (especially after editing the /etc/grub/40_custom file) just fine.

...until you update or change one of the other distros, you have to edit it manually again, instead of running "update-grub"...

btw, you can also run the os-prober script seperately.

Inodoro Pereyra · 2016-01-09 13:36:30

I have one in the #! forum.
The problem is really Debian, and its childish (IMHO) commitment to not include "non-free" stuff. Like I said, I have installed plenty of other distros (Kali, Fedora, Semplice, Lubuntu, etc), and half-installed many others, and never had a problem. The only reason I'm considering coming back to Debian is because Viperr was kind of a disappointment when it came to upgrading it, and Fedora 23 comes with Gnome, which is, as far as I'm concerned, almost as ugly as Unity. Otherwise, I wouldn't bother.

About grub, what do you mean? /etc/grub/40_custom gets deleted when you update grub?
In any case, if I can personalize Debian (which is what I'm trying to do now), I don't expect to be installing any new distro anytime soon. And there's always a chance they fix the problem in the meantime.

damo · 2016-01-09 13:51:43

Inodoro Pereyra wrote:

...
The problem is really Debian, and its childish (IMHO) commitment to not include "non-free" stuff....

Why not install a Debian non-free iso then?

Inodoro Pereyra · 2016-01-09 14:26:18

damo wrote:

Why not install a Debian non-free iso then?

Umm... Because I didn't know? :8
Thanks anyway for the tip. I guess in the future I'm gonna have to read more before doing something...

Head_on_a_Stick · 2016-01-09 18:59:52

Inodoro Pereyra wrote:

The problem is really Debian, and its childish (IMHO) commitment to not include "non-free" stuff

Read this:
https://www.debian.org/social_contract

Principles are not childish.

Fedora is also opposed to proprietary software:

The Fedora Project strongly encourages using free and open source software. Fedora has licensing guidelines that enforce the following requirements:
If it is proprietary, it cannot be included in Fedora. (Binary firmware is the only exception to this)
If it is legally encumbered, it cannot be included in Fedora.
If it violates United States laws (specifically, Federal or applicable state laws), it cannot be included in Fedora.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Forbidde … iddenItems

ohnonot · 2016-01-09 19:13:00

^ yes, i agree with that. it's not childish at all.

Inodoro Pereyra wrote:

Debian, and its childish (IMHO) commitment to not include "non-free" stuff.

i can see your poin though.
imho, debian is some sort of proto-distro, and others then go and make other distros from it (or inofficial "with non-free" isos).
if, otoh, you want to know what's going on inside your machine, you know you can trust debian.
imagine if that would change!

debian is the clear spring water that others use to make beer.
some get the bottled stuff, some brew their own.
imagine you had only other beer to make beer from! yuck!

Inodoro Pereyra · 2016-01-11 17:42:23

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

Read this:
https://www.debian.org/social_contract
Principles are not childish.
Fedora is also opposed to proprietary software:
The Fedora Project strongly encourages using free and open source software. Fedora has licensing guidelines that enforce the following requirements:
If it is proprietary, it cannot be included in Fedora. (Binary firmware is the only exception to this)
If it is legally encumbered, it cannot be included in Fedora.
If it violates United States laws (specifically, Federal or applicable state laws), it cannot be included in Fedora.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Forbidde … iddenItems

Yep. principles can be childish. Funny though, how on point 4 of the "social contract", they say "Our priorities are our users", yet they have no problem on complicating the user's experience by not including hardware drivers, just because they are "non free". Maybe they have their own meaning for the word "priority", just as they have for "free"? Call me old fashioned, but all my life I've been under the impression that "free" is something you don't have to pay for.

And yeah, Fedora is also opposed to proprietary software. Yet I have installed Viperr, and Fedora 21 and 23, and never had a firmware problem. Maybe they use a different "free" definition?

@Ohnonot: I understand what you say, but the same can be said about Fedora, for example. But if you want to make a distro, as they claim, "The Universal Linux Distribution", you have to make it universally available. Not everybody knows how to deal with a firmware problem. Even I, after 6 years using Linux, wouldn't have known what to do, if it wasn't for you guys.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2016-01-11 17:48:54

Inodoro Pereyra wrote:

all my life I've been under the impression that "free" is something you don't have to pay for

And this is why you are failing to grasp the reasons behind the principles that guide the Debian project.

When Debian speaks of "free" software, they are not referring to the monetary cost but rather to the fact that the source code of the software is freely available for the user to read and/or modify and/or copy as they see fit.

For the Debian project, the freedom to control the software on your computer is far more important than the small convenience that could be gained from giving this up.

damo · 2016-01-11 17:54:26

Split this to Off-Topic if it continues?

Head_on_a_Stick · 2016-01-11 17:57:21

^ Yes, that's my plan

IP doesn't usually agree with people ]:D

Inodoro Pereyra · 2016-01-11 19:05:28

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

^ Yes, that's my plan
IP doesn't usually agree with people ]:D

Don't. It's a dead issue, anyway.

...And I disagree with your last statement. ]:D ]:D ]:D

I do understand what you say. However, the fact remains that Fedora (which is also committed to free software -unless they use MY definition for "free"-), does include the "non-free" driver. I could understand if Debian offered it as an option, but not offering it at all is not serious, and definitely not consistent with that "Our priorities are our users" statement.

#21 2016-01-07 21:25:25

Re: [SOLVED]LILO for grub?

#22 2016-01-08 07:31:28

Re: [SOLVED]LILO for grub?

#23 2016-01-08 07:49:08

Re: [SOLVED]LILO for grub?

#24 2016-01-08 17:35:12

Re: [SOLVED]LILO for grub?

#25 2016-01-09 09:29:12

Re: [SOLVED]LILO for grub?

#26 2016-01-09 13:36:30

Re: [SOLVED]LILO for grub?

#27 2016-01-09 13:51:43

Re: [SOLVED]LILO for grub?

#28 2016-01-09 14:26:18

Re: [SOLVED]LILO for grub?

#29 2016-01-09 18:59:52

Re: [SOLVED]LILO for grub?

#30 2016-01-09 19:13:00

Re: [SOLVED]LILO for grub?

#31 2016-01-11 17:42:23

Re: [SOLVED]LILO for grub?

#32 2016-01-11 17:48:54

Re: [SOLVED]LILO for grub?

#33 2016-01-11 17:54:26

Re: [SOLVED]LILO for grub?

#34 2016-01-11 17:57:21

Re: [SOLVED]LILO for grub?

#35 2016-01-11 19:05:28

Re: [SOLVED]LILO for grub?

Board footer