> > > lilo -r /linux -v
> >
> >No. This is the wrong way to do it. You are likely to get a version
> >conflict as you will be running the lilo executable on tomsrtbt against
> >the boot.b file on your system.
>
> uhh, i don't get it.
> what exactly conflicts with what?
I don't get what you don't get.
Lilo includes several files. One is "lilo", one is "boot.b".
Those files must come from the same version of lilo.
> it seems to me if there is a valid lilo executable on tomsrtbt
> then it should work.
Maybe it should, but it doesn't.
> why should there be any question of a conflict
> depending on where you are picking up the lilo executable?
Because you are not picking up boot.b from the same place.
Say, tomsrtbt includes lilo version 20, and the -r makes it look on your
disk for boot.b, and boot.b is from version 21. When you use "lilo -r",
it picks up the boot.b file from the new root, which will likely not
match.
Lilo will refuse to run.
Maybe it *SHOULD* work. But it doesn't. Lilo *REQUIRES* that boot.b come
from the same version of lilo.
> I am sure I am missing an obvious point here....
Just that it is known not to work. I have not researched any of the
"why" questions. Of course, you could set up a lilo.conf file to point to
the boot.b file distributed with tomsrtbt. But, it is much easier to just
use chroot. Again,
"lilo -r /mnt/linux" # probably fails
"chroot /mnt/linux /sbin/lilo" # probably works
because in the second case the version of "lilo" and "boot.b" will be in
sync, in the first, they may or may not be in sync.
-Tom
--
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe"
as the Subject.
