New Bootloader for FreeBSD

Dan writes "FreeBSD Release Engineering team's Scott Long has written a bootloader front-end script that allows one to enable/disable acpi, boot single users, etc. His primary motivation was to allow users to easily disable ACPI, since so many problems are popping up these days with it. He is hoping to have this be on at least the i386 bootcd for FreeBSD 5.1 scheduled for release June 2nd, and is looking for feedback."

Comments

It's not a bootloader

[ciaran_o_riordan]

Heh, great research. He's written a "bootloader front-end script that allows one to enable/disable acpi". Not a boot loader.

He says later that "[if] the script cannot start, it might leave your loader unable to load the kernel".

For people interested in actual boot loaders, GRUB is looking for people to work on the BSD loading code (it works but needs some updating).

Ciaran O'Riordan

Re:It's not a bootloader

[Arandir]

Read the article again. It's not a "bootloader" front-end script, but a "bootloader front-end script". Notice the difference in quotes. One is a bootloader, and the other is a front-end script to a bootloader.

p.s. Please people, take him up on his offer of working on the BSD loading code for GRUB. It's seriously out of date. I've got my own projects on the front burner so I can't at the moment.

Re:It's not a bootloader

[shlong]

Dude, give the editors a break on this one. I purposely made the subject of my announcement abiguous in order to attract attention. Which sounds better, "New Bootloader!", or "My attempt to enhance the user experience with 100 lines of Forth".
Anyways, this is just a start. Hopefully I'll have some time to do cool stuff, like have the loader scan for kernels and present you with a choice, control the serial console, etc. While GRUB is cool and all, editing configuration files is still a turn-off to many people.

Re:It's not a bootloader

[Arandir]

Get a clue dude! BSD folk (like me) don't want to write GPLd software, don't want to link to GPLd software, and don't want to put GPLd software in the base system if we can help it, but we have no problem with *using* GPLd software if its worthwhile. Use the best tool for the job.

GRUB is not part of any BSD's base system. It's part of the ports collection. The user can choose to use GRUB or not, just as they can choose to use bash or not. No recipient of a BSD system is going to encumbered by GRUB.

There are times when GPLd software does make sense for the base system (from the FreeBSD perspective). That's when the software is clearly the best of breed and won't encumber anything else. A good example is GNU tar.

GRUB and BootMgr (FreeBSD) are two different kinds of boot loaders. GRUB requires installation in a partition but offers a lot of flexibility. BootMgr only requires a boot block but has only a fraction of the feature set. Depending on your circumstances, one may be more suitable than the other. I prefer BootMgr at home because I rarely boot into other operating systems. At work I need a boot floppy to get into FreeBSD (since I can't alter the MBR). GRUB is the easiest way to make a FreeBSD boot floppy, bare none. My friend prefers GRUB because he is often booting into different operating systems and he can configure GRUB from any of them (all you need is a text editor, no boot0cfg, liloconfig, etc).

p.s. GRUB does work with FreeBSD, but it needs updating, specifically for FreeBSD-5.0.

Re:It's not a bootloader

[evilviper]

Get a clue dude! BSD folk (like me) don't want to write GPLd software, don't want to link to GPLd software, and don't want to put GPLd software in the base system if we can help it, but we have no problem with *using* GPLd software if its worthwhile.

Just so you know, you are lecturing someone who is typing this message on a notebook with OpenBSD 3.3 installed, using an OpenBSD 3.2/Alpha fileserver as a foot-rest, and has a FreeBSD 4.7 box to my left.

don't want to write GPLd software

Well the parent wants you to!

GRUB requires installation in a partition but offers a lot of flexibility.

Wonderful. I was asking what exactly those features are... I would especially like to hear what incredible features make it worth the effort of doing the coding work, and worth the hassle of actually using the GRUB command-line, which is more cumbersome than any other boot-loader (with a command-line) that I've used. Saying "It's so great dude!" isn't exactly going to change my mind.

Re:It's not a bootloader

[TheRaven64]

Wonderful. I was asking what exactly those features are.

The most useful feature fo grub is the way that removing the partition which contains your bootloader makes your system unbootable. Particularly useful if you frequently install new OSes... (although I've stopped trying to find a decent Linux distro now I've installed FreeBSD.)

Ahem

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not a new boot loader. It's a new interactive script that runs on the existing boot loader. The FICL (Forth-Inspired Command Language) based loader has always allowed you to do things like this. It's a nice addition anyway, although I'll probably disable it on my machine if it gets committed.

GRUB's not bad

[siskbc]

Wonderful. I was asking what exactly those features are... I would especially like to hear what incredible features make it worth the effort of doing the coding work, and worth the hassle of actually using the GRUB command-line, which is more cumbersome than any other boot-loader (with a command-line) that I've used. Saying "It's so great dude!" isn't exactly going to change my mind.

First, to disclose, I'm a linux user (Hey! stop throwing things!) though I'm thinking of trying some *BSD flavor. I used to use LILO, it really sucks (I'm sure you guys are really going to argue that one, huh?), so I tried GRUB. It doesn't.

Now, as some pundits have said, GRUB does sort of render your box a tad inoperable if you remove the HDD or partition that contains GRUB. Now, that's not so fun, but it would screw you the same if you removed the HDD with the MBR you're booting from, even if you use a different loader, and that's a similar issue. And really, reinstalling grub on the new HDD isn't hard either assuming you're not swapping drives every day (at which point it might become tedious). So I don't think GRUB's immobilizing one of your drives is a big deal.

I like a few things about GRUB. First, it has no cylinder issues or boot partition size issues like some boot loaders (ahem: LILO!). Also, you don't have to reinstall the loader when you make a configuration change, which is nice if you're screwing with things. Changing the config file is sufficient. Configuration is pretty simple too. It just seems to have a good clean implementation of whatever you'd need to do - kind of like the opposite of sendmail, that's the best way I can put it.

Now, don't get me wrong - I don't LIKE that I like GRUB, as I also tend to avoid GNU software whenever possible (if not GPL software), simply because I consider Stallman to be an annoying turd. But all in all, I think GRUB's a pretty nice bootloader, especially for us poor linux hacks who get tired of mucking around with LILO.

Admittedly, I'm not the best person to be comparing GRUB to BSD bootloaders, but no one else seems to be sticking up for it at all. ;)