Ubuntu and practically every other Linux distribution use the GRUB2 boot loader. Unless you have multiple operating systems installed, this bootloader is normally hidden — but it provides options you may sometimes need. The boot loader is the part of Linux that loads when you first boot up your computer. It normally just boots the Linux kernel, which loads the rest of the operating system — but it also provides a menu with options of its own.

Access the GRUB2 Menu

RELATED: «Linux» Isn’t Just Linux: 8 Pieces of Software That Make Up Linux Systems To access the GRUB2 bootloader menu, you’ll need to restart your computer — or boot it if it’s shut off. If you have a dual-boot system installed, you’ll always see the GRUB2 menu appear when you boot your computer. That’s the default setting for a computer with multiple operating systems, as this menu provides a way to choose between them at boot. By default, Ubuntu and other Linux distributions hide this menu. You can access the hidden menu by holding down the Shift key at the very start of the boot-up process. If you see your Linux distribution’s graphical login screen instead of the menu, restart your computer and try again.

Boot Other Operating Systems and Tools

By default, GRUB2 will boot the Linux operating system you’ve installed. Use the Up and Down arrow keys as well to select and option in the menu, and press Enter to boot the selected menu entry. If you have other operating systems installed — whether they’re Windows or other Linux distributions — you can use select and boot them from here. Your Linux distribution should automatically configure GRUB to list your other installed operating systems when you install it. You can also access some additional tools here, although the exact options available will depend on your Linux distribution. For example, Ubuntu offers a “Memory test (Memtest86+)” option. This menu entry will boot the Memtest86+ memory-testing tool. Select it and press Enter to quickly perform a memory test without having to burn Memtest86+ to a disc or create a bootable USB drive from it. Press Escape or reboot your computer to leave the memory-testing environment. run-memtest86 -from-grub

Boot Different Linux Kernels

GRUB2 is also where you can choose between your installed Linux kernels. The Linux kernel is the core of the operating system, and new Linux kernels with updates and fixes often arrive via your Linux distribution’s package manager. To switch to a new Linux kernel, you have to reboot your operating system and boot into it. This all happens automatically the next time you boot. However, in some cases, a new Linux kernel might have a problem on your system. It may refuse to boot after you update, or you may experience hardware problems. For this reason, Linux distributions generally keep at least one older Linux kernel around. You can switch to the older Linux kernel by rebooting into your GRUB boot loader and selecting the old kernel. Ubuntu configured GRUB to hide these options under “Advanced options for Ubuntu.” Select it and press Enter and you’ll see a list of Linux kernels you can choose to boot. The most recent kernel appears at the top of the list, has the highest version number, and is selected by default.

Use Recovery Mode

Ubuntu also provides a “Recovery Mode” option here. Other Linux distributions may provide something similar. Boot into recovery mode and you’ll see a list of options designed to help you troubleshoot and recover an Ubuntu installation. If you ever need to fix your Ubuntu system, the options here may help. However, these tools aren’t as easy-to-use and helpful as the graphical system repair tools you’d find on a Windows installation disc.

Edit Boot Options

RELATED: What Are «Runlevels» on Linux? GRUB2 has some more advanced options. You can press c to open a GRUB2 command-line environment, where you can run various GRUB2 commands. Or, you can select a boot option and press e to edit that menu entry’s boot options by hand. For example, this would allow you to boot into different “runlevels.” By default, your Linux distribution probably boots into runlevel 5, which generally starts the system with a graphical desktop. You could boot into runlevel 3 — the standard system without a graphical desktop — or runlevel 1 — a single-user mode designed for administrative tasks. To change boot options, select a boot entry with your arrow keys and press e. Edit the boot options and press Ctrl+X or F10 when you’re ready to boot. To edit the runlevel, locate the line beginning with “linux,” go to the very end of it, add a space, and then type the number of the runlevel you wanted to use. Note that the “linux” line may be very long and split across multiple lines. For example, below we’ve moved the text-entry cursor to the end of the “linux” line. Next, we pressed space and typed 3 to specify runlevel 3. Pressing Ctrl+X or F10 would boot to runlevel three. This change is only temporary — it will just be used once and GRUB2 won’t remember it in the future. You shouldn’t need to tamper with GRUB2 much — it usually does its job and stays out of the way. Even people who need to use GRUB2 will generally just use it as a menu to choose their desired operating system when they boot their computers. Image Credit: Paul Schultz on Flickr READ NEXT

  • › How to Configure the GRUB2 Boot Loader’s Settings
  • › How to Upgrade a Linux Dual-Boot System to Windows 10
  • › How to Roll Back the Kernel in Linux
  • › How to Dual-Boot Windows 10 with Windows 7 or 8
  • › What Exactly Happens When You Turn On Your Computer?
  • › How to Fix an Ubuntu System When It Won’t Boot
  • › How to Automatically Switch Apple Watch Faces
  • › How to Use Your Car as an Emergency Electricity Source During a Blackout

Linux Boot Partitions and How to Set Them Up

Let’s have a look how traditional Linux distributions set up
/boot/ and the ESP, and how this could be improved.
How Linux distributions traditionally have been setting up their
“boot” file systems has been varying to some degree, but the most
common choice has been to have a separate partition mounted to
/boot/. Usually the partition is formatted as a Linux file system
such as ext2/ext3/ext4. The partition contains the kernel images, the
initrd and various boot loader resources. Some distributions, like
Debian and Ubuntu, also store ancillary files associated with the
kernel here, such as kconfig or System.map. Such a traditional
boot partition is only defined within the context of the distribution,
and typically not immediately recognizable as such when looking just
at the partition table (i.e. it uses the generic Linux partition type
UUID). With the arrival of UEFI a new partition relevant for boot appeared,
the EFI System Partition (ESP). This partition is defined by the
firmware environment, but typically accessed by Linux to install or
update boot loaders. The choice of file system is not up to Linux, but
effectively mandated by the UEFI specifications: vFAT. In theory it
could be formatted as other file systems too. However, this would
require the firmware to support file systems other than vFAT. This is
rare and firmware specific though, as vFAT is the only file system
mandated by the UEFI specification. In other words, vFAT is the only
file system which is guaranteed to be universally supported. There’s a major overlap of the type of the data typically stored in
the ESP and in the traditional boot partition mentioned earlier: a
variety of boot loader resources as well as kernels/initrds. Unlike the traditional boot partition, the ESP is easily recognizable
in the partition table via its GPT partition type UUID. The ESP is
also a shared resource: all OSes installed on the same disk will
share it and put their boot resources into them (as opposed to the
traditional boot partition, of which there is one per installed Linux
OS, and only that one will put resources there). To summarize, the most common setup on typical Linux distributions is
something like this:

Type Linux Mount Point File System Choice
Linux “Boot” Partition /boot/ Any Linux File System, typically ext2/ext3/ext4
ESP /boot/efi/ vFAT

As mentioned, not all distributions or local installations agree on
this. For example, it’s probably worth mentioning that some
distributions decided to put kernels onto the root file system of the
OS itself. For this setup to work the boot loader itself [sic!] must
implement a non-trivial part of the storage stack. This may have to
include RAID, storage drivers, networked storage, volume management,
disk encryption, and Linux file systems. Leaving aside the conceptual
argument that complex storage stacks don’t belong in boot loaders
there are very practical problems with this approach. Reimplementing
the Linux storage stack in all its combinations is a massive amount of
work. It took decades to implement what we have on Linux now, and it
will take a similar amount of work to catch up in the boot loader’s
reimplementation. Moreover, there’s a political complication: some
Linux file system communities made clear they have no interest in
supporting a second file system implementation that is not maintained
as part of the Linux kernel. What’s interesting is that the /boot/efi/ mount point is nested
below the /boot/ mount point. This effectively means that to access
the ESP the Boot partition must exist and be mounted first. A system
with just an ESP and without a Boot partition hence doesn’t fit well
into the current model. The Boot partition will also have to carry an
empty “efi” directory that can be used as the inner mount point, and
serves no other purpose. Given that the traditional boot partition and the ESP may carry
similar data (i.e. boot loader resources, kernels, initrds) one may
wonder why they are separate concepts. Historically, this was the
easiest way to make the pre-UEFI way how Linux systems were booted
compatible with UEFI: conceptually, the ESP can be seen as just a
minor addition to the status quo ante that way. Today, primarily two
reasons remained:

  • Some distributions see a benefit in support for complex Linux file
    system concepts such as hardlinks, symlinks, SELinux labels/extended
    attributes and so on when storing boot loader resources. – I
    personally believe that making use of features in the boot file
    systems that the firmware environment cannot really make sense of is
    very clearly not advisable. The UEFI file system APIs know no
    symlinks, and what is SELinux to UEFI anyway? Moreover, putting more
    than the absolute minimum of simple data files into such file
    systems immediately raises questions about how to authenticate them
    comprehensively (including all fancy metadata) cryptographically on
    use (see below).
  • On real-life systems that ship with non-Linux OSes the ESP often
    comes pre-installed with a size too small to carry multiple Linux
    kernels and initrds. As growing the size of an existing ESP is
    problematic (for example, because there’s no space available
    immediately after the ESP, or because some low-quality firmware
    reacts badly to the ESP changing size) placing the kernel in a
    separate, secondary partition (i.e. the boot partition) circumvents
    these space issues.

File System Choices

We already mentioned that the ESP effectively has to be vFAT, as that
is what UEFI (more or less) guarantees. The file system choice for the
boot partition is not quite as restricted, but using arbitrary Linux
file systems is not really an option either. The file system must be
accessible by both the boot loader and the Linux OS. Hence only file
systems that are available in both can be used. Note that such
secondary implementations of Linux file systems in the boot
environment – limited as they may be – are not typically welcomed
or supported by the maintainers of the canonical file system
implementation in the upstream Linux kernel. Modern file systems are
notoriously complicated and delicate and simply don’t belong in boot
loaders. In a trusted boot world, the two file systems for the ESP and the
/boot/ partition should be considered untrusted: any code or
essential data read from them must be authenticated cryptographically
before use. And even more, the file system structures themselves are
also untrusted. The file system driver reading them must be careful
not to be exploitable by a rogue file system image. Effectively this
means a simple file system (for which a driver can be more easily
validated and reviewed) is generally a better choice than a complex
file system (Linux file system communities made it pretty clear that
robustness against rogue file system images is outside of their scope
and not what is being tested for.). Some approaches tried to address the fact that boot partitions are
untrusted territory by encrypting them via a mechanism compatible to
LUKS, and adding decryption capabilities to the boot loader so it can
access it. This misses the point though, as encryption does not imply
authentication, and only authentication is typically desired. The boot
loader and kernel code are typically Open Source anyway, and hence
there’s little value in attempting to keep secret what is already
public knowledge. Moreover, encryption implies the existence of an
encryption key. Physically typing in the decryption key on a keyboard
might still be acceptable on desktop systems with a single human user
in front, but outside of that scenario unlock via TPM, PKCS#11 or
network services are typically required. And even on the desktop FIDO2
unlocking is probably the future. Implementing all the technologies
these unlocking mechanisms require in the boot loader is not
realistic, unless the boot loader shall become a full OS on its own as
it would require subsystems for FIDO2, PKCS#11, USB, Bluetooth
network, smart card access, and so on.

File System Access Patterns

Note that traditionally both mentioned partitions were read-only
during most parts of the boot. Only later, once the OS is up, write
access was required to implement OS or boot loader updates. In today’s
world things have become a bit more complicated. A modern OS might
want to require some limited write access already in the boot loader,
to implement boot counting/boot assessment/automatic fallback (e.g.,
if the same kernel fails to boot 3 times, automatically revert to
older kernel), or to maintain an early storage-based random seed. This
means that even though the file system is mostly read-only, we need
limited write access after all. vFAT cannot compete with modern Linux file systems such as btrfs
when it comes to data safety guarantees. It’s not a journaled file
system, does not use CoW or any form of checksumming. This means when
used for the system boot process we need to be particularly careful
when accessing it, and in particular when making changes to it (i.e.,
trying to keep changes local to single sectors). It is essential to
use write patterns that minimize the chance of file system
corruption. Checking the file system (“fsck”) before modification
(and probably also reading) is important, as is ensuring the file
system is put into a “clean” state as quickly as possible after each
modification. Code quality of the firmware in typical systems is known to not always
be great. When relying on the file system driver included in the
firmware it’s hence a good idea to limit use to operations that have a
better chance to be correctly implemented. For example, when writing
from the UEFI environment it might be wise to avoid any operation that
requires allocation algorithms, but instead focus on access patterns
that only override already written data, and do not require allocation
of new space for the data. Besides write access from the boot loader code (as described above)
these file systems will require write access from the OS, to
facilitate boot loader and kernel/initrd updates. These types of
accesses are generally not fully random accesses (i.e., never partial
file updates) but usually mean adding new files as whole, and removing
old files as a whole. Existing files are typically not modified once
created, though they might be replaced wholly by newer versions.

Boot Loader Updates

Note that the update cycle frequencies for boot loaders and for
kernels/initrds are probably similar these days. While kernels are
still vastly more complex than boot loaders, security issues are
regularly found in both. In particular, as boot loaders (through
“shim” and similar components) carry certificate/keyring and denylist
information, which typically require frequent updates. Update cycles
hence have to be expected regularly.

Boot Partition Discovery

The traditional boot partition was not recognizable by looking just at
the partition table. On MBR systems it was directly referenced from
the boot sector of the disk, and on EFI systems from information
stored in the ESP. This is less than ideal since by losing this
entrypoint information the system becomes unbootable. It’s typically a
better, more robust idea to make boot partitions recognizable as such
in the partition table directly. This is done for the ESP via the GPT
partition type UUID. For traditional boot partitions this was not done

Current Situation Summary

Let’s try to summarize the above:

  • Currently, typical deployments use two distinct boot partitions,
    often using two distinct file system implementations
  • Firmware effectively dictates existence of the ESP, and the use of
  • In userspace view: the ESP mount is nested below the general
    Boot partition mount
  • Resources stored in both partitions are primarily kernel/initrd, and
    boot loader resources
  • The mandatory use of vFAT brings certain data safety challenges,
    as does quality of firmware file system driver code
  • During boot limited write access is needed, during OS runtime
    more comprehensive write access is needed (though still not fully
  • Less restricted but still limited write patterns from OS
    (only full file additions/updates/removals, during
    OS/boot loader updates)
  • Boot loaders should not implement complex storage stacks.
  • ESP can be auto-discovered from the partition table, traditional
    boot partition cannot.
  • ESP and the traditional boot partition are not protected
    cryptographically neither in structure nor contents. It is expected
    that loaded files are individually authenticated after being read.
  • The ESP is a shared resource — the traditional boot partition a
    resource specific to each installed Linux OS on the same disk.

How to Do it Better

Now that we have discussed many of the issues with the status quo ante, let’s see how we can do things better:

  • Two partitions for essentially the same data is a bad idea. Given
    they carry data very similar or identical in nature, the common case
    should be to have only one (but see below).
  • Two file system implementations are worse than one. Given that vFAT
    is more or less mandated by UEFI and the only format universally
    understood by all players, and thus has to be used anyway, it might
    as well be the only file system that is used.
  • Data safety is unnecessarily bad so far: both ESP and boot partition
    are continuously mounted from the OS, even though access is pretty
    restricted: outside of update cycles access is typically not
  • All partitions should be auto-discoverable/self-descriptive
  • The two partitions should not be exposed as nested mounts to userspace

To be more specific, here’s how I think a better way to set this all up would look like:

  • Whenever possible, only have one boot partition, not two. On EFI
    systems, make it the ESP. On non-EFI systems use an XBOOTLDR
    partition instead (see below). Only have both in the case where a
    Linux OS is installed on a system that already contains an OS with
    an ESP that is too small to carry sufficient kernels/initrds. When a
    system contains a XBOOTLDR partition put kernels/initrd on that,
    otherwise the ESP.
  • Instead of the vaguely defined, traditional Linux “boot” partition
    use the XBOOTLDR partition type as defined by the Discoverable
    Specification. This
    ensures the partition is discoverable, and can be automatically
    mounted by things like
    systemd-gpt-auto-generator. Use
    XBOOTLDR only if you have to, i.e., when dealing with systems that
    lack UEFI (and where the ESP hence has no value) or to address the
    mentioned size issues with the ESP. Note that unlike the traditional
    boot partition the XBOOTLDR partition is a shared resource, i.e.,
    shared between multiple parallel Linux OS installations on the same
    disk. Because of this it is typically wise to place a per-OS
    directory at the top of the XBOOTLDR file system to avoid conflicts.
  • Use vFAT for both partitions, it’s the only thing
    universally understood among relevant firmwares and Linux. It’s
    simple enough to be useful for untrusted storage. Or to say this
    differently: writing a file system driver that is not easily
    vulnerable to rogue disk images is much easier for vFAT than for
    let’s say btrfs. – But the choice of vFAT implies some care needs to
    be taken to address the data safety issues it brings, see below.
  • Mount the two partitions via the “automount
    logic. For example, via systemd’s
    units, with a very short idle time-out (one second or so). This
    improves data safety immensely, as the file systems will remain
    mounted (and thus possibly in a “dirty” state) only for very short
    periods of time, when they are actually accessed – and all that
    while the fact that they are not mounted continuously is mostly not
    noticeable for applications as the file system paths remain
    continuously around. Given that the backing file system (vFAT) has
    poor data safety properties, it is essential to shorten the access
    for unclean file system state as much as possible. In fact, this is
    what the aforementioned systemd-gpt-auto-generator
    logic actually does by default.
  • Whenever mounting one of the two partitions, do a file system check
    (fsck; in fact this is also what
    systemd-gpt-auto-generatordoes by default, hooked into
    the automount logic, to run on first access). This ensures that even
    if the file system is in an unclean state it is restored to be clean
    when needed, i.e., on first access.
  • Do not mount the two partitions nested, i.e., no
    more /boot/efi/. First of all, as mentioned above, it
    should be possible (and is desirable) to only have one of the
    two. Hence it is simply a bad idea to require the other as well,
    just to be able to mount it. More importantly though, by nesting
    them, automounting is complicated, as it is necessary to trigger the
    first automount to establish the second automount, which defeats the
    point of automounting them in the first place. Use the two distinct
    mount points /efi/ (for the ESP) and
    /boot/ (for XBOOTLDR) instead. You might have guessed,
    but that too is what systemd-gpt-auto-generator does by
  • When making additions or updates to ESP/XBOOTLDR from the OS make
    sure to create a file and write it in full, then
    syncfs() the whole file system, then rename to give it
    its final name, and syncfs() again. Similar when
    removing files.
  • When writing from the boot loader environment/UEFI to ESP/XBOOTLDR,
    do not append to files or create new files. Instead overwrite
    already allocated file contents (for example to maintain a random
    seed file) or rename already allocated files to include information
    in the file name (and ideally do not increase the file name in
    length; for example to maintain boot counters).
  • Consider adopting
    which minimize the number of files that need to be updated on the
    ESP/XBOOTLDR during OS/kernel updates (ideally down to 1)
  • Consider adopting
    which minimizes the number of files that need to be updated on boot
    loader updates (ideally down to 1)
  • Consider removing any mention of ESP/XBOOTLDR from
    /etc/fstab, and just let
    systemd-gpt-auto-generator do its thing.
  • Stop implementing file systems, complex storage, disk encryption, …
    in your boot loader.

Implementing things like that you gain:

  • Simplicity: only one file system implementation, typically only
    one partition and mount point
  • Robust auto-discovery of all partitions, no need to even
    configure /etc/fstab
  • Data safety guarantees as good as possible, given the

To summarize this in a table:

Type Linux Mount Point File System Choice Automount
ESP /efi/ vFAT yes
XBOOTLDR /boot/ vFAT yes

A note regarding modern boot loaders that implement the Boot Loader
both partitions are explicitly listed in the specification as sources
for both Type #1 and Type #2 boot menu entries. Hence, if you use such
a modern boot loader (e.g. systemd-boot) these two partitions are the
preferred location for boot loader resources, kernels and initrds

Addendum: You got RAID?

You might wonder, what about RAID setups and the ESP? This comes up
regularly in discussions: how to set up the ESP so that (software)
RAID1 (mirroring) can be done on the ESP. Long story short: I’d
strongly advise against using RAID on the ESP. Firmware typically
doesn’t have native RAID support, and given that firmware and boot
loader can write to the file systems involved, any attempt to use
software RAID on them will mean that a boot cycle might corrupt the
RAID sync, and immediately requires a re-synchronization after
boot. If RAID1 backing for the ESP is really necessary, the only way
to implement that safely would be to implement this as a driver for
UEFI – but that creates certain bootstrapping issues (i.e., where to
place the driver if not the ESP, a file system the driver is supposed
to be used for), and also reimplements a considerable component of the
OS storage stack in firmware mode, which seems problematic. So what to do instead? My recommendation would be to solve this via
userspace tooling. If redundant disk support shall be implemented for
the ESP, then create separate ESPs on all disks, and synchronize them
on the file system level instead of the block level. Or in other
words, the tools that install/update/manage kernels or boot loaders
should be taught to maintain multiple ESPs instead of one. Copy the
kernels/boot loader files to all of them, and remove them from all of
them. Under the assumption that the goal of RAID is a more reliable
system this should be the best way to achieve that, as it doesn’t
pretend the firmware could do things it actually cannot do. Moreover
it minimizes the complexity of the boot loader, shifting the syncing
logic to userspace, where it’s typically easier to get right.

Addendum: Networked Boot

The discussion above focuses on booting up from a local disk. When
thinking about networked boot I think two scenarios are particularly

  1. PXE-style network booting. I think in this mode of operation focus
    should be on directly booting a single UKI image instead of a boot
    loader. This sidesteps the whole issue of maintaining any boot
    partition at all, and simplifies the boot process greatly. In
    scenarios where this is not sufficient, and an interactive boot
    menu or other boot loader features are desired, it might be a good
    idea to take inspiration from the UKI concept, and build a single
    boot loader EFI binary (such as systemd-boot), and include the UKIs
    for the boot menu items and other resources inside it via PE
    sections. Or in other words, build a single boot loader binary that
    is “supercharged” and contains all auxiliary resources in its own
    PE sections. (Note: this does not exist, it’s an idea I intend to
    explore with systemd-boot). Benefit: a single file has to be
    downloaded via PXE/TFTP, not more. Disadvantage: unused resources
    are downloaded unnecessarily. Either way: in this context there is
    no local storage, and the ESP/XBOOTLDR discussion above is without
  2. Initrd-style network booting. In this scenario the boot loader and
    kernel/initrd (better: UKI) are available on a local disk. The
    initrd then configures the network and transitions to a network
    share or file system on a network block device for the root file
    system. In this case the discussion above applies, and in fact the
    ESP or XBOOTLDR partition would be the only partition available
    locally on disk.

And this is all I have for today. Every operating system provides a tiny program called a boot loader whose job
is to load the rest of the operating system into your computer’s memory at
boot time. It is typical of the Linux personality that it gives you a choice
of boot loaders. If you will be running Linux on a computer by itself, there is no need to read
any further, you want to use LILO as your boot loader. You can skip ahead to
the section about LILO. If you are planning for Linux to share your computer
with Windows, DOS, or another operating system, your choice will involve a
little more discrimination. When setting up a multiple boot PC with Linux, you have three choices about
how to get it loaded: LILO, Loadlin, or floppy. Let’s examine each separately.

LILO, the Linux Loader¶

Although opinions vary, LILO is certainly the most popular boot loader for
Linux. It resides on your hard drive, and at boot time it presents you with a
“boot prompt” where you can choose an operating system to boot, choose a
particular Linux kernel to load, and pass special parameters to the Linux
kernel when it is loaded. LILO is fast, flexible, and independent, since it
does not require any other operating system to be present. This makes it the
loader of choice for Linux-only systems. LILO does have a few limitations, however, which means it is not perfect for
everyone. For starters, LILO can install itself in two places on your hard
drive: the boot sector of a partition (what’s a partition?), or the master boot record of the hard drive. The
master boot record is the place on your hard drive that your computer’s BIOS
looks for the bootstrap program that will load your operating system. This
can be LILO, or it can be the DOS (and Windows) boot loader. If there is no
other operating system present, LILO will have to be in the master boot
record. However, some operating systems, notably Windows NT, don’t like for
the master boot record to be altered. Also, some disk utilities will see the
master boot record as “corrupted” and will kindly “fix” it for you, thus
erasing LILO and preventing you from booting Linux. If you run into problems like this, you can install LILO into the boot sector
of the Linux partition, and allow the DOS boot loader to live in the master
boot record. In order to boot Linux, you will need to use the DOS version of
fdisk to set the Linux partition “active” and reboot your PC to get into
Linux. This is of course a big pain. Another limitation of LILO is that it uses only your PC’s BIOS to access your
hard drive. While this is not normally a problem, some new hard drives are so
big that the PC’s BIOS may have difficulty reading it all. (This is due to a
limitation in the BIOS itself that goes back to the original IBM PC.) The
short explanation is that, due to this limitation, all of the files LILO needs
to access must reside within the first 1024 cylinders of your hard drive. For
a modern LBA BIOS, that means under the 8GB mark. If you have an especially large hard drive and your other operating system
already takes up more space than this, you may need to jump through some hoops
to get LILO to work. You will either need to repartition your drive so that
Linux can have a partition within the first 1024 cylinders, or you will need
to install Linux (not LILO, but Linux) onto a second hard drive, again within
the first 1024 cylinders. LILO is capable of loading Linux from a second hard
drive with the same limitations.

Installing to the master boot
record makes booting very fast.
Some utilities or operating system install programs
might overwrite the master boot record, erasing LILO.
You will then need an alternate method of booting
Linux to repair LILO.
Gives you the option at boot time
to choose an operating system.
All files needed by LILO must reside
in the first 1024 cylinders
(8GB) of the drive.

Booting Linux with Loadlin¶

For those who cannot use LILO because of its limitations, or those who will
spend the majority of their time in Windows and very little using Linux,
Loadlin is an excellent alternative. Loadlin is a utility that runs under DOS.
It loads the Linux kernel into memory right on top of DOS. All of Loadlin’s
files, including the Linux kernel itself, reside on your DOS partition. Like
LILO, Loadlin allows you to pass parameters to the Linux kernel at load time.
But because it uses the operating system driver rather than the BIOS to read
the hard drive, there is no 1024 cylinder limit as with LILO. Of course, the main disadvantage of Loadlin is that you must boot to DOS
before you can load Linux. If you are running Windows 95/98, that means you
will have to reboot to MS-DOS mode, or make changes to the Windows
configuration so that it goes there by default. And whereas most Linux
distributions will install LILO for you, saving you the trouble of the initial
configuration, with Loadlin you are usually left to do it all on your own. I find that Loadlin makes an excellent “backup” bootloader. Normally I use
LILO, but if LILO ever fails because some program clobbered my master boot
record, it is nice to be able to just load Linux from within DOS to repair the
damage rather than digging at the bottom of the closet trying to find that
boot floppy!

Loadlin Pros Loadlin Cons
No 1024 cylinder limit. Requires DOS to load before Linux every time.
Does not alter master boot record
of your hard drive.
Usually requires manual configuration.

Booting Linux from Floppy Disk¶

Booting from floppy is the slowest but most reliable method, the least common
denominator for boot loaders. Loading the Linux kernel from floppy disk means
taking a couple of extra minutes to boot the system, but once it is loaded all
your normal Linux programs will run from the hard drive, so your system
performance will not suffer. The small size of the disk might limit the
capabilities of your Linux kernel, which can grow quite large if you like to
experiment, but most of the “stock” kernels shipping with current Linux
distributions will fit on a floppy without any trouble. Of course floppies are easily lost or damaged, so you’d better have more than
one! On the other hand, there are no cylinder limitations on floppy disks, and
you don’t have to worry about your master boot record at all. It’s a good idea
to keep a boot floppy around for emergencies, but I would not use this method
regularly unless it is absolutely necessary.

Boot Floppy Pros Boot Floppy Cons
No 1024 cylinder limit. Extremely slow to load.
Does not alter master boot record
of your hard drive.
Floppy disks are easily lost or damaged.
Limits the size of kernel you can boot.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *